Source
r/thelema•
whywolf93

Thelema and Hinduism

Hi everyone! Over the last months I've been getting closer and and closer to Hindu practices and philosophy. I've always been attracted to it such as I've always been fond of the occult. Many things are changing in my life and I feel as if these changes are pushing me into following these primal attractions.

I am, indeed, a neophyte and therefore I have problems trying to make sense out of the importance of Will in Thelema and the death of ego in Hinduism, as if both paths were exclusive and even contradictory. I would appreciate your thoughts about this question.

Blessings!

Posted Mar 18, 2016, 12:11 PM UTC

616
danrmt•

True Will is not the will of the ego

5
MarquisDesMoines•

To elaborate on the basic answers given here, the True Will and the ego are entirely separate things. Crowley's view on the ego actually falls along similar lines as Hinduism's. Namely, it's an illusion to be dissolved. The idea of the True Will is comparable to (though I'd argue, not the exact same as) the concept of Dharma in Hinduism and Buddhism. It is that which you MUST do and doing it keeps the cosmos in general harmony.

Thelema and Hindu beliefs have much in common or at least comparable. I'd say the biggest difference is that Crowley gradually grew to not believe in the concept of an Atman (ie. an ultimate inner self or soul). The concept of Hadit seems similar and is in many ways but I think Crowley would argue that the issue is the Atman is 1 (ie. isolate, ultimate unto itself) whereas Hadit is 0 or Naught (ie. not something that can be identified by any rational or reasonable means, ultimately unidentifiable and therefor essentially no-thing). This would bring him closer to Buddhism or Taoist thought (but again, not identical to).

If you're interested in the concept you might benefit from studying what Crowley called the Naples arrangement which was (to put simply) his attempt at using the layout of the Qabalistic Tree of Life and a few Hindu concepts to describe the "sheaths" of self that surround the essential Nothingness that is the closest thing to a True Self. Crowley's association of the Ultimate with Nothing can be difficult to understand intellectually but he talks about it a lot in his first ever essay on mysticism/magick called Berashith and in Liber 333 (aka the Book of Lies).

4
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
McBuggered•

I'd argue that True Will and ego death are actually very similar. The stripping away of the false self.

2
sunkindonut149•

true will has nothing to do with ego or any negative concept from these religions. a couple of folks i knew grew up hindu and believe in that along with thelema.

some thelemites have a beef with religion because their parents were strict or something. that's b.s. because your true will does not preclude you from believing in any religion including christianity.

1
MarquisDesMoines•

your true will does not preclude you from believing in any religion including christianity.

Errr. This is a separate topic but I don't think that's true. I think Orthodox/Catholic Christianity is right out. If you want to include your definition of Christianity to include more gnostic branches that could be feasible. Same with Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism. They all have things to teach us, but the literalism within their respective "orthodox" traditions makes them incompatible with Thelema. You can believe that Buddha, Mohammed, and the men later mythologized into Jesus and Krishna were good teachers for their age (they are all acknowledged as reaching the degree of Magus by Crowley, for example). You can adopt aspects of their techniques into your own without issue. You'd even be fine using their images as focuses for rituals of various sorts. But you cannot believe that any of them are THE one true representative of the Divine/Ultimate which the hardcore of their orthodoxies have claimed as their cornerstone.

In Thelema YOU have to be the center of the cosmos, learn what that means and how to deal with it.

3
sunkindonut149•

My perspective is that what they believe is between themselves and their HGAs. Who am I to tell them what they can and can't do and what is 'right' for their particular orbit? The work serves us, otherwise why would it exist? Our time is finite. Better to focus on our own work.

They are welcome to any ritual I choose to hold, and if they choose to represent themselves as a Thelemite I'm going to make certain assumptions about their knowledge, but not police them about their identity.

If they harass people that's not unthelemic or whatever that's just unfraternal. And unfraternal behavior is not to be accepted in any lodge, even as simple a lodge as any circle of aspirants gathering for tea.

1
MarquisDesMoines•

They are welcome to any ritual I choose to hold, and if they choose to represent themselves as a Thelemite I'm going to make certain assumptions about their knowledge, but not police them about their identity.

You are correct in that as Thelemites we have the right to worship our god by whatever rites which choose. My issue is more with the belief and it's underlying consequences.

If they harass people that's not unthelemic or whatever that's just unfraternal.

It's absolutely unthelemic to harass/proselytize to others. I personally believe the Roman Catholic Church is an absolute lie and harmful to it's members but it would be unthelemic of me to stand outside their church yelling at them and handing out tracts. We can promulgate Thelema through positive actions, which others are free to partake in or not.

That being said, if I saw a Thelemite who believed (for example) that a literal human named Jesus died for his "sins" and that he needed to obey him, I'd certainly want to help him out of this delusion. I'd be limited in how I could do so, and ultimately I can't stop him from either believing as he chooses or claiming to be a Thelemite, just as I can't stop a crazy homeless man from believing he's the lost Dali Llama. But the fact is both the belief in a literal Jesus and in being a lost Dali Llama are clearly holding these individuals back and ultimately doing them harm. If there's reasonable steps I can take to correct the error of another, it's a fair, non-derogatory act of service to do so.

4
sunkindonut149•

I feel that a lot of Crowley's ideas about these other belief systems are kind of simplistic though. Like there are many saints and belief systems that are considered Hindu, or Muslim.

I'm not religious, nor was I raised in religion but from what I can remember, the literal word meaning 'sin' in the new testament means to miss the mark.

If someone obeys Jesus blindly they might be more likely to avoid a prison sentence for stealing stuff because thou shalt not steal, than if they followed a life of crime for example. I feel that as long as they don't push it on someone they can believe what they want.

1
Los_93•

Who am I to tell them what they can and can't do and what is 'right' for their particular orbit?

You weren't talking about action - you were talking about beliefs. In that context, this is like saying, "Who am I to tell someone else that he's wrong if he believes he can fly under his own power?"

Sorry, but there are right and wrong answers. This fact does not change just because the subject is delusional beliefs.

1
sunkindonut149•

I hope you are aware of a difference between faith in a supreme being or higher power, and some dude jumping out of a window.

2