Is this a Thelemic ‘attitude’?

Home Forums Community Sandbox Is this a Thelemic ‘attitude’?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #111607

    Jeffrey D. Evans
    Participant

    Should a Thelemite exclaim “I couldn’t care less that ‘The Book of the Law’ says ‘who sorroweth is not
    of us’.” (AL II:19), and still consider themselves a genuine proponent of Thelema? I would like to hear anyone’s thoughts on this.

    #111608

    Michael Staley
    Participant

    @jeffrey-d-evans

    Should a Thelemite exclaim “I couldn’t care less that ‘The Book of the Law’ says ‘who sorroweth is not
    of us’.”

    Well, as the person who uttered those terrible words, I consider myself “a genuine proponent of Thelema”. A Thelemite is someone who accepts the Law of Thelema. The Book of the Law contains many conflicting sentiments, as is readily apparent to all but the voluntarily blind by simply comparing the first chapter with the third chapter.

    If your definition of a Thelemite is someone who accepts everything in The Book of the Law then OK. Personally I think that position can be maintained only by a contortionist, but each to his or her own.

    #111609

    ignant666
    Participant

    A Thelemite is one who accepts the Law of Thelema: “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law” [emphasis added].

    There is no added clause in this formulation that says something like “and must also agree that ‘who sorroweth is not of us’”, at least as far as i can see.

    Thus the answer to your question “Should a Thelemite exclaim “I couldn’t care less that ‘The Book of the Law’ says ‘who sorroweth is not of us’.” (AL II:19), and still consider themselves a genuine proponent of Thelema?” is “Of course they should, if it is their will to do so”.

    #111610

    Shiva
    Participant

    JDE: Should a Thelemite exclaim “I couldn’t care less that ‘The Book of the Law’ says ‘who sorroweth is not of us’.” (AL II:19), and still consider themselves a genuine proponent of Thelema? I would like to hear anyone’s thoughts on this.

    At the heart of sorrow, we find the Universal Joke. We find it pictured as a clown in the center of a wilting rose in The Three of Swords, Sorrow.

    Sorrow

    I’m not sure why anyone “couldn’t care less” about AL which exclaims sorrow excludes the poor, sad person from being a Thelemite. There is a glitch in my mentat that prevents understanding of what is asked or intended.

    Ig: There is no added clause in this formulation that says something like “and must also agree that ‘who sorroweth is not of us’”, at least as far as i can see.

    The “added clause” is, There is no law beyond do what thou wilt. You’re right, nothing about sorrow as the cause of losing one’s License To promote Thelema.

    #111613

    Tiger
    Participant

    the old gray sphere that rolls in the infinite Far-off”
    is the earth;
    for the place into which the Adept is caught up
    to hold communion with his Angel
    is remote
    from the material Universe.
    Nevertheless this wine
    which may symbolize CCXX itself
    or even the poetry or the biography of the man 666
    is guaranteed to posses the virtue
    of intoxicating the inhabitants of this planet. “

    A.C. Liber LXV commented iv,60 Equinox V no 2 pg 191

    #111619

    Jeffrey D. Evans
    Participant

    Well, at least words only cause confusion: not much more! Regarding verbal contortionists, though, look at many good ko-ans!!

    #111854

    Jeffrey D. Evans
    Participant

    Ignant 666: “Of course they should, if it is their will to do so.”

    Perhaps the way I phrased my question was a bit misleading. No line in The Book of the Law says ‘Every man and every woman is a Thelemite’, but it does say that “Every man and every woman is a star.” (AL I:3).

    #111855

    Shiva
    Participant

    JDE: No line in The Book of the Law says ‘Every man and every woman is a Thelemite’, but it does say that “Every man and every woman is a star.” (AL I:3).

    This is because every man and woman has what is known as a “core star” in their (very) deep energy field (in a dimension beyond the aura & chakras). But to do something about it, like seek one’s Will (in relation to that star) is to become a Thelemite (more or less). If “Every act is a magical act,” then “Every seeker is a Thelemite.” (c)2019

    It is a very small % of humanity that is seeking their Will (or anything in that neighborhood). “Let my servants be few and secret.” I think the non-seekers are the “low men,” the “slaves of because.” They get a star, but no Thelemic label.

    #111856

    elitemachinery
    Participant

    @jeffrey-d-evans said:

    “No line in The Book of the Law says ‘Every man and every woman is a Thelemite’, but it does say that “Every man and every woman is a star.” (AL I:3).”

    @shiva said:

    “This is because every man and woman has what is known as a “core star” in their (very) deep energy field (in a dimension beyond the aura & chakras).”

    Something I’ve noticed is that when many people repeat the phrase:

    “Every man and every woman is a star.”

    it often gets repeated as:

    “Every man and woman is a star.” (see above)

    An easy mistake to make and one i have caught myself making many times.

    To say “every man and every woman” is much more egalitarian, making sure that NO ONE is left out and it also seems to me to represent each sex and each individual as being distinctly whole and complete in and of themselves. In other words Aiwass is saying “each and every one of us” is a unique star in the universe.

    If AL had stated:

    “Every man and woman is a star.”

    instead of

    “Every man and every woman is a star.”

    It would also make my proposed Easter Egg obsolete.

    The resulting alternative “Everyman and woman is a star” doesn’t really sound right or work as a possible interpretation.

    Whether or not an Easter Egg was the intention of Aiwass, it is clear to me that Aiwass chose his words carefully. Hence, the continual evolution of our understanding and interpretations of the Book.

    Re the OP and his question. The full quote in context from Liber AL chapter II is:

    17. Hear me, ye people of sighing!
    The sorrows of pain and regret
    Are left to the dead and the dying,
    The folk that not know me as yet.
    18. These are dead, these fellows; they feel not. We are not for the poor and sad: the lords of the earth are our kinsfolk.
    19. Is a God to live in a dog? No! but the highest are of us. They shall rejoice, our chosen: who sorroweth is not of us.
    20. Beauty and strength, leaping laughter and delicious languor, force and fire, are of us.

    To paraphrase, I would say it as:

    “There is great joy and strength in those that serve me. Those who are sad don’t ‘get it.'”

    Basically, if you get the true message of Thelema there is nothing to do but rejoice and follow your True Will. You will be empowered by the Freedom and Power to follow your True Will and be taking action to fulfill it.

    Sadness comes when we feel as if we are slaves forced to serve against our will or feel we have no True Will or cannot follow the path we yearn for.

    #111859

    Jeffrey D. Evans
    Participant

    Shiva said: “This is because every man and woman has what is known as a ‘core star’ in their (very) deep energy field (in a dimension beyond the auras & chakras). But to do something about it, like seek one’s Will (in relation to that star) is to become a Thelemite (more or less).”

    Firstly, why “…their (very) deep energy field…”, as opposed to very “high”, very “inner”, or even very “lateral”? To write of a “…dimension beyond the auras & chakras….” necessitates the abandonment of all those preconceived notions of what we have come to know as”dimensions”. To become a star is to unite with & identify with a star in the Body of Nuit, i.e. Infinite Space, as Kenneth Grant accomplished with Sothis/Sirius (Set-Isis) ; and as his Power Zone the K’rla Cell (or Lodge) accomplished through his assistance in focusing that Cell on the star Ibt-al-Ghauzi (Betelgeuse). With that assistance, the Priestess of the Lodge (KARLA-NAOUS, 403) focused on a star in Gemini (in the Winter Hexagon, very near to Sothis) which enabled another member of the Cell (MAZNIN, 158) to focus on a “Dark Star” (black hole) in Sagittarius, at the opposite point on the plane of the ecliptic. (That Work was a continuation of a Working begun by Grant’s Nu-Isis Lodge in 1956, when the Priestess functioning at that time uttered the Word MARLA, which predicted KARLA). The resulting polarity between the members of the K’rla Cell has produced some amazing results, and insights into “Liber AL vel Legis.” See chapter 6 of “Beyond the Mauve Zone” for a brief discussion of the Work of that Lodge. Mr. Grant planned three chapters on its results, but unfortunately the Cell found very few occultists with the magickal and/or intellectual capacity (or desire) to provide any assistance.
    Also, regarding the statement of Shiva, “It is a very small % of humanity that is seeking their Will (or anything in that neighborhood)”, I would like to know: when was the last time he (or she?) took a poll? Please provide the results!

    To elitemachinery: I like your writing, and the types of questions you pose, but be cautious paraphrasing Liber AL. In particular, see chapter I, vss. 35-36, vs. 52, & vs. 54; chapter II, vs. 27, vs. 54, & vs. 75; and chapter III, vs. 39, and
    vss. 47–49, in this respect.

    #111860

    elitemachinery
    Participant

    Hmmm, not sure i’m down with where this thread is heading. Feels more like an interrogation at this point. Was a crime committed?

    #111862

    Tiger
    Participant

    khor-lo bde-mchog – khrag ‘thung – blood absorber

    ordinary conceptions cling to ordinary identities
    perpetuating ordinary cycles
    out there can be deep in
    its all in in the egg

    chapter 6 of “Beyond the Mauve Zone” interesting book, chapter
    welcome Jeffrey D. Evans

    always wise words from you Shiva !

    #111863

    ignant666
    Participant

    It’s Spring, i tell you, Spring! (replying to em’s “interrogation” comment)

    What would “very ‘lateral'” even mean?

    Also, regarding the statement of Shiva, “It is a very small % of humanity that is seeking their Will (or anything in that neighborhood)”, I would like to know: when was the last time he (or she?) took a poll? Please provide the results!

    Do you seriously doubt or dispute that Fr. Shiva’s statement is correct? You actually think hard data is needed here?

    As to whether Shiva is “he” or “she”, admirable PC-ness, but poor attention to homework: he is a “Frater”, not a “Soror”, named after a male deity. Persons inclined to put on their little thinking caps, rather than pouting (naming no names here), might be able to grope their way to some conclusions here.

    #111881

    Jeffrey D. Evans
    Participant

    To Elitemachinery: no interrogation here, I assure you! (As you question in your post of Mar. 14, 1.59 p.m.) But you were the one who said, “…it is clear to me that Aiwass chose his words very carefully” earlier that same day, at 7.38 a.m. I agree with you; just overstated the obvious in making my observations. I actually told you I liked your posts.

    In reply to Tiger’s post of Mar. 14 at 2.33 p.m.: Thanks for the kind words in. re. “Beyond the Mauve Zone” and about cptr. 6. Also, for the welcome! The same to you., I assure you!

    To Ignant 666 and your post of 14 Mar., 2.46 p.m. : No, Sir, it’s only Spring for us North of the Equator! It’s Fall in Australia.
    In. re. your statement “Do you seriously doubt or dispute…”, etc., my remark was simply a casual joke. Crowley’s writing was rife with them.
    And, of course Shiva’s an ostensibly male deity, but can also be depicted as androgynous when in union with Shakti. (Like the Hebrew Elohim, which is a masculine noun terminating in a feminine plural. Also, consider Baphomet, an archetypal occult androgyne.) Anyway, it was just an attempt to be “correct” in the face of humanity’s ever-changing social mores. For example, I have a friend whose Brother insists I’m “really gay” (even though I’m not) and due to that — plus other factors — prefers the “umbrella term, transgender” for just about everybody. She thinks that to define oneself by one’s gender (or sexual predilections) is to “limit” oneself.
    Besides, I seem to recall a very masculine Beast on the Path who once functioned as “Alyse Cusack” for a while. So what’s the problem? No offense was intended, I assure you. It seems to me that an aspiring yogi could experiment with a work of bhakti to Krishna by dressing as Radha, performing mantra japa, and accomplish the intended result to some degree without in any way insulting themselves, or anyone else. A fair deal of focus might be attained by overcoming the social prohibitions against such a thing.
    Now that I know Shiva to some extent — even through an intermediary — I’ll address him properly so as to not make him (or anyone else) angry.
    At any rate, I joined LAShTAL.com in order to dialogue, not to “spar”.

    #111885

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    “A Thelemite is someone who accepts the Law of Thelema”
    Is this rather than a Thelemite being somebody who is (theoretically) trying to discover, and/or (practically) carrying out, whatever is their ‘unique and sovereign’ True Will?

    Whether or not an Easter Egg was the intention of Aiwass, it is clear to me that Aiwass chose his words [e.g., “Every man and every woman is a star”] carefully. Hence, the continual evolution of our understanding and interpretations of the Book.

    I have found that “every” time the word/ letters ‘EVER’ appear in The Book of the Law it tends to point to a meaningful key or cypher of some kind, in the sense of I:20 (also consider ‘all is ever as it was’, ‘nor shalt thou know ever’ etc…)

    Without wishing to seem mysterious, I am unable to say any more regarding this at the present time.

    However please carry on,
    Norma N Joy Conquest

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.