The Food of the Gods

by Uncategorized

Ever since I had the insight that led me to write the short post on Harpocrates, the implications of it have spread like an invasive weed throughout all the rest of my thinking and perception.

It made its way into my post on the upward and downward paths in the Mass. It showed up in my NOTOCON talk. It’s lurking in the background of my recent article on healing and magic.

It really is just taking over.

The idea is quite simple. Each of us has been implanted with a divine seed. The seed consists in almost nothing more than remembrance of the Light we knew before incarnating. This seed lies dormant and silent within each of us, so that most people are not even aware of its existence. If it speaks to us at all, it is subtle and cryptic. It will speak to us seemingly from without, by guiding us into certain areas of life. It will speak to us seemingly from within, in the form of dreams. But most people take no notice of it.

But when we do take notice of it, a miracle occurs. It begins to grow. And so by seed and root and stem and bud and leaf and flower and fruit it will unfold and articulate itself into the light.

And I’ve come to the realization that the life-cycle of this seed is really the major theme of the spiritual path called Thelema—although the exact same phenomenon shows up in other forms of spirituality as well.

Crowley refers to this phenomenon under various names: secret self, silent self, seed, Aleph, Harpocrates, Hoor-paar-kraat, Virgin, the Fool who impregnates the King’s Daughter, etc. He always associates it with Malkuth, which is the soil in which it is implanted. He refers to its characteristic way of growth or development as true will.

Everything we do spiritually is not for our own sake but rather for the sake of this divine seed implanted within us.

But as we make the cultivation of this god within the theme and focus of our lives, something very odd happens. It begins to eat us. It consumes us.

Normally we understand the events of our lives to constitute a self. Ideas, thoughts, sense impressions, images, desires, words spoken, emotions felt, people loved, events remembered, events hoped for, actions carried out, paths chosen—we consider all of it to be mine. We think it is for a self, in a self, that it belongs to a self, that it is attached to a self, etc.

But as the divine seed sprouts and grows and unfolds within us, all of these happenings become food for, and become incorporated into, the growing body of this god. None of them—not even a simple sense impression or perception—happens for its own sake anymore. None of it—not even the simplest decision—can be said to be mine in the conventional sense of the term. Instead it is another element in the unfolding, developing image of this divine being.

We are the food of the gods.

What I describe may sound alien, even horrifying. But it only seems this way when we think we have something to lose through the process. This comes from the delusion that any of these thoughts, feelings, desires, or actions constitute a unity on their own. They don’t. But by becoming part of the metabolism and life cycle of the god, they acquire unity for the first time, the way the soup of molecules in the atmosphere becomes metabolized and structured into the outward form of a leaf.

At last, saying “I” can mean something.

It also gives new meaning to the expression, “There is no part of me that is not of the gods!”

The turning point for any person spiritually is when they realize that all the pain in their lives, all the difficulty and struggle and hardship, has never come from allowing this process to happen but has always arisen from resisting it. And that all the peace, happiness, and well-being lies in serving the divine within ourselves so it can fruit and release its seed into the world.

This is the means by which one becomes a god.

What is Thelema?

by Uncategorized

Thelema is a religion founded in 1904 by the English poet and mystic, Aleister Crowley (1875-1947), who is regarded as its prophet. Those who follow the path of Thelema are called Thelemites.1

Thelema (Θελημα) is a Greek word for will, and the essential teaching of Thelema is “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” Of this teaching Crowley said,

“Do what thou wilt…” is to bid Stars to shine, Vines to bear grapes, Water to seek its level; man is the only being in Nature that has striven to set himself at odds with himself.2

From this we may infer that the essential teaching of Thelema is that each person ought to live in accordance with nature as expressed through their individual being. In this respect, Thelema is similar to Stoicism, Buddhism, or other religions which teach us to live according to the laws set by nature rather than God or human beings. Yet the Thelemic view of the universe according to Crowley differs in fundamental respects from what is taught in other religions and philosophies.

“Had! The manifestation of Nuit. The unveiling of the company of heaven.” (AL I.1-2)3

The foundation of Thelema is Liber AL vel Legis, which is Latin for Book AL or the Book of the Law.4

The Book of the Law was dictated to Aleister Crowley in Cairo, Egypt in 1904 by a spiritual being that called itself Aiwass. This book declared a new age for humanity, the Aeon of the Child, and proclaimed a new law for the conduct of all human beings: Do what thou wilt.

The universe described by the Book of the Law consists in two irreducible entities or concepts: the totality of possibilities of all kind, and any point of view on those possibilities. The first is symbolized by the Egyptian sky goddess, Nuit, and the second is represented by the Egyptian sun god, Hadit.5

“Every man and every woman is a star.” (AL I.3)

Experience arises when Hadit (the self of each individual) unites with some possibility inherent in Nuit (the spatiotemporal universe). Each person is “an aggregate of such experiences, constantly changing with each fresh event” or a star.6

Crowley describes each individual star or consciousness as an absolute monad: simple, utterly indestructible, as well as omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. These are characteristics usually attributed to God, and indeed, Crowley taught that each star was the center and origin of its own universe.7

“For I am divided for love’s sake, for the chance of union.” (AL I.29)

Throughout our lives, and even throughout the course of a day, many events occur that imply oppositions or dualities. We experience pleasant versus unpleasant sensations, sorrowful versus happy occurrences, success versus failure in our endeavors, cruelty versus kindness in our actions, self versus world, self versus others, and many more. But the universe appears to us this way, because it is only by means of opposition that our Hadit or god-self can have experience and learn about itself. While each of us encounters constant opposition from the world and others, this opposition is both necessary and willed.8 From this, the supreme teaching of Thelema follows:9

“Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.” (AL I.40)

Crowley speaks of the will in two basic senses. On the one hand, each person has to discover for themselves what their purpose in life is. This could involve discovering which particular career or form of service suits your personality best and dedicating yourself wholeheartedly to it.10 It also means being free to express one’s individuality artistically and sexually, to work and to play as suits one’s own nature, and even to move across the face of the earth without interference from others.11 Crowley calls this the finite will or your will in the context of this life.12

Then there is your will in eternity or your infinite will, which is the will of Hadit—your true self—to explore every possibility available to itself, even across many incarnations. Crowley calls this the Great Work or the union of Hadit with Nuit.13

These need not be seen as two separate wills but rather two perspectives on the same will: the will seen from the perspective of this incarnation, where each moment presents us with the choice between doing our will versus not doing it, and the perspective of eternity, wherein every occurrence accords with our will, because every moment is necessary and perfect in and of itself.14

“Love is the law, love under will.” (AL I.57)

Every event whatsoever is an act of love, as each consists in the uniting of Hadit or the divine self of each individual with a possibility inherent in Nuit.15 While it is technically impossible not to do your will (seen from the infinite perspective), it is possible (from the finite perspective) to desire not to do your will, and from this arises suffering.16 It is therefore up to each of us to discover for ourselves what our true will is and to accept and desire to fulfill it rather than thwart it. Crowley calls the methods for achieving this magick.17

“Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains.” (AL II.9)

Since all events are acts of love under will, it follows that, at its very foundation, existence is joyful. Sorrow arises when we think of any two things as opposed to one another. Some one event pleases us so we call it “good,” and another is unpleasant so we call it “bad”. But they are all fundamentally “good,” because they are all the effect of Hadit loving Nuit, which itself is the natural result of each of us doing our will.18 This love of Hadit for Nuit eventually culminates in the union between the two which occurs at death, and therefore “death is the crown of all.”19

While there is more to Thelema than what is presented here, the rest are largely implications or practices intended to achieve these ideals. For further information, the reader is encouraged to explore the resources footnoted in this section.

1 https://oto-usa.org/thelema/
2 “Notes for an Astral Atlas,” in Magick in Theory and Practice (MITAP), Appendix III.
3 Chapters and verses of the Book of the Law are notated AL Chapter.Verse
4 AL is a Hebrew name for God.
5 Introduction to The Book of the Law (Intro).
6 Intro.
7 Intro and New Comment (NC) on AL I.3.
8 NC to AL I.29.
9 NC on AL I.3
10 MITAP (Introduction) and Liber CL (Section I).
11 Liber LXXVII.
12 Liber CL (Section I).
13 Ibid.
14 Intro.
15 Ibid.
16 NC on AL 1.51 and Liber CL.
17 Intro.
18 Djeridensis Comment on AL II.9.
19 NC on AL II.72.

References

Orange reflecting glass

On the relation between the finite will and the infinite will

by Uncategorized

Orange reflecting glassIt’s in the nature of the human mind to always be in the process of bringing about some new state of affairs. There is a general, indeterminate desire to live, to be, to become, that exists outside of conscious choice. You can call it “conatus” as Spinoza did, “fabrication” as the Buddha did, or “true will” as Crowley did, but I think they’re pointing at the same basic phenomenon. This is why, even though so many people have noticed that life is miserable and full of suffering, suicide is (relatively) rare. Even a person who kills themselves out of despair is operating under the illusion that doing so will bring about a state of affairs better than the one they currently occupy.

But the will does not operate in a vacuum. It operates in a body, through a nervous system, in a context established by genetics and environment. So when we look upon ourselves, we never find ourselves just doing nothing at all. It’s always under some description. We’re usually desiring something at the moment.

(The exceptions—like ennui or angst—are interesting. I don’t know if anyone has ever tried giving a Thelemic interpretation of those experiences.)

“This will (as such) is not conscious. We can only become aware of it, and thus enjoy and learn from the Event, by making an Image of it. Reason is the machine whose function it is to do this.” (Djeridensis Comment on AL II.28-31)

Will informs the Ruach in two senses. Will is the content given to the Ruach, and then the latter must make sense of the former, turning it into concrete programs of action. And then in a deeper sense, the Ruach itself is willed, i.e., it is an expression of true will (as any occurrence of life is). This means that the discovery of one’s true will—or more accurately, the understanding of the operation of true will in one’s own life—requires self-reflection and self-consciousness.

Now when the Ruach reflects itself and attempts to form a concept of this true will, from a certain perspective, it has to fail. For one thing, the very act of reflecting is itself willed and not adequately captured in the reflection. For another, if you’re looking for a representation of the true will, you’ll never produce it, because the true will is infinite. But you can form an idea of it, and that idea consists in what one ideally wants.

There are two senses of this concept. In one sense, you’re thinking about who you would like to be. This is the aspirational concept of will, what Crowley bashes as the “higher self” concept. But there’s another way to use the concept, and that’s in a descriptive capacity. You look at what you actually do and generalize a statement or a word from it. This is hard to accomplish, because we’re not set up to be objective about ourselves. But if you work with another person, you might be able to distill this operation of will in the context of your life—your reason for existing, so to speak—into a statement. And then you can use that statement to help filter your choices in life.

For the individual formulating it, such a statement must, to use Plato’s words, be a moving image of eternity. It has to give a sense or a feeling in the here and now of the basic urge of Hadit toward Nuit, which is beyond all concepts. But it also has to get at that dimension of finite action that strives for the indeterminate. In order to serve this function, it must be (a) actionable but (b) not aimed toward any particular thing like a set of steak knives or a Cadillac El Dorado. It’s a gift you are naturally bringing which has the power to transform the world.

So for example, my own statement along these lines is, “To guard against what is arbitrary so that the true light may shine forth.” At a deep level, I want and have always wanted to live in a world where things and people are free to show themselves exactly as they are, where they are released to themselves to be themselves. But there are many ways to bring this about. The characteristic way I do this is by clearing away what is arbitrary and keeping it at bay. Sometimes this comes out as listening carefully and not judging; other times it comes out as irreverence toward the sedimented layers of custom. But I do it naturally, basically without thinking, thus fulfilling the Thelemic idea of the relationship between the will and reason:

When reason usurps the higher functions of the mind, when it presumes to dictate to the Will what its desires ought to be, it wrecks the entire structure of the star. The Self should set the Will in motion, that is, the Will should only take its orders from within and above. It should not be conscious at all.  (Ibid.)

So my claim is that, in the context of this nervous system, in the context of what we conventionally call “Frater Entelecheia,” this is how infinite will operates. This is how the impersonal pulse of life manifests as a particular person. It takes a different form in other bodies, for other lives, on other planets, etc.

Technically speaking, the world could change such that things and people were always showing themselves for what they are. But it’s not feasible. So in effect, the statement describes an infinite task, a never-ending project which is nevertheless enjoyable, and so it functions as a moving image of eternity, which again, gives an adequate feeling (at least) of the interaction of Hadit and Nuit.

So in a nutshell, that’s how I imagine the philosophical or mystical dimension of Thelema linking up with the practical dimension. If you have no interest in things like Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel, but you wanted to know how the concept of true will could help inform your life, this is sort of the stereo manual version of that.

Though it’s worth pointing out, in conclusion, that the two things are not disconnected, either:

“Far better, let him assume this Law to be the Universal Key to every problem of Life, and then apply it to one particular case after another. As he comes by degrees to understand it, he will be astounded at the simplification of the most obscure questions which it furnishes. Thus he will assimilate the Law, and make it the norm of his conscious being; this by itself will suffice to initiate him, to dissolve his complexes, to unveil himself to himself; and so shall he attain the Knowledge and Conversation of his Holy Guardian Angel.” (New Comment on AL III.60)

For more on the process of formulating a statement of your finite true will, see my article on Thelemic Union about individual why discovery.

Star spiral

The ground of the distinction between the finite will and the infinite will

by Uncategorized

Star spiral1. “[Hadit] hath no Nature of His own, for He is that to which all Events occur.” (Djeridensis Comment on AL II.2)

2. The nature of something is its characteristic behavior, the way it tends to act.

3. Actions are intelligible in terms of their ends. Running and cooking are differentiated by the results they tend to realize. (It’s not necessary for the result to be separate from the doing. Consider the action “standing up.”)

4. Having no nature, Hadit has no characteristic end. (“For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect.” AL II.44)

5. But Hadit is not for that reason without activity. (“‘Come unto me’ is a foolish word: for it is I that go.” AL II.7)

6. Hadit is pure going—action done for its own sake. This is the same thing as Hadit having Nuit for his end. “But to love me is better than all things” (AL I.61) “Now Hadit knows Nuit by virtue of his ‘Going’ or ‘Love.’ It is therefore wrong to worship Hadit; one is to be Hadit, and worship Her.” (New Comment to AL II.8)

7. Hadit is the true self of the aspirant. (“Thou who art I beyond all I am, who hast no nature and no name…” Liber XV)

8. The activity of the true self is the true will. (“…the Adept will be free to concentrate his deepest self, that part of him which unconsciously orders his true Will…” Liber Samekh)

9. My true will being infinite—having no goal other than Nuit—it cannot be captured by any finite expression, not even a single word.

10. This is the ground for the distinction between finite will and infinite will which Crowley makes in Liber CL: “And to each will come the knowledge of his finite will, whereby one is a poet, one prophet, one worker in steel, another in jade. But also to each be the knowledge of his infinite Will, his destiny to perform the Great Work, the realization of his True Self.”

11. But the distinction between the finite will and the infinite will is a distinction of thought, not a real distinction. In other words, the difference between the infinite will and the finite will is a difference made only by the finite will. This is because the infinite will—almost by definition—can’t have anything to do with other than itself or its own pure activity.