Do what thou wilt? Good or bad? On the nature of Desire.

[Cantando]

Aleister Crowley once said, ‘Do what thou wilt’, meaning do what you like. If you feel like doing something, go ahead. St Augustine actually said something similar. So, was there any difference? I think there was a very big one.

There is born within the human soul one initial desire – to unite with God (or if you prefer, Source) in love and joy. The self is the conglomeration of mind, body and consciousness surrounding the soul, like a shell. As we experience life, this single desire, like a laser beam, becomes split into many different rays and colours, filtering through the self and emerging as many different needs and desires.

The wise person may follow his/her desires, while still being aware of, and aligned with, their true source. If you are still united with source in your desires, then your are free to do as you wish, as you are always acting in accordance with God’s will (or your true self’s will, if you prefer). This is what St Augustine means. This is true freedom (Good).

However, if you selfishly follow a desire and you just want it for its own, egotistical satisfaction, you have cut yourself off from the true source, and you are then acting like Crowley. This is true slavery (Evil).

This duality will always exist as long as the soul forgets or ignores the purpose of its initial, true desire. Another analogy I like is the river. If the river is our true desire, then the tributaries are the individual desires we have during our life. If the tributaries remain open and connected to the river, we are OK. If we selfishly identify with a particular desire, the tributary becomes cut off from the river (and we are up sh*t creek without a paddle, to coin a phrase).

Just my current musings.

Here endeth the Monday sermon.

[mercuryrising]

I was just reading this Penthouse interview with L. Ron Hubbard Jr. in which he states his father practiced black magick and believed he was the Beast, as did Aliester Crowley. LRH Jr. akinned Scientology to the Third Reich.

I was thinking about how the ego is the conditioned self, the being we are taught to believe we are, and the soul is who we really are. The black magician or darkworker appeals to the ego. He'll say, "You are not good enough, but I can give you what you need." The white magician or lightworker appeals to the soul. He says, "You already have everything you need, I can only point you towards the source." What's tricky is that both teach releasing the ego.

The first preaches, "Do as thou will and let it be the whole of the Law" and the second preaches "Love is the whole of the Law." I agree with what you are saying, but I think to extract the true benefit of either path it is best not to be lukewarm. Either you can or cannot be bought.

[bellemeadows]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

. . . . The black magician or darkworker appeals to the ego. He'll say, "You are not good enough, but I can give you what you need. . . ."

I think that modern marketers and black magicians may have something in common. . . . (just a little 21st century, western-european culture joke).

Enjoying the topic very much -- thanks for sharing, Belle

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Aleister Crowley once said, ‘Do what thou wilt’, meaning do what you like. If you feel like doing something, go ahead. St Augustine actually said something similar. So, was there any difference? I think there was a very big one.

There is born within the human soul one initial desire – to unite with God (or if you prefer, Source) in love and joy. The self is the conglomeration of mind, body and consciousness surrounding the soul, like a shell. As we experience life, this single desire, like a laser beam, becomes split into many different rays and colours, filtering through the self and emerging as many different needs and desires.

The wise person may follow his/her desires, while still being aware of, and aligned with, their true source. If you are still united with source in your desires, then your are free to do as you wish, as you are always acting in accordance with God’s will (or your true self’s will, if you prefer). This is what St Augustine means. This is true freedom (Good).

However, if you selfishly follow a desire and you just want it for its own, egotistical satisfaction, you have cut yourself off from the true source, and you are then acting like Crowley. This is true slavery (Evil).

This duality will always exist as long as the soul forgets or ignores the purpose of its initial, true desire. Another analogy I like is the river. If the river is our true desire, then the tributaries are the individual desires we have during our life. If the tributaries remain open and connected to the river, we are OK. If we selfishly identify with a particular desire, the tributary becomes cut off from the river (and we are up sh*t creek without a paddle, to coin a phrase).

Just my current musings.

Here endeth the Monday sermon.

great topic!

It seems that we have been taught to be afraid of our desires. When really the universe or source wants us to want. I feel most alive when I want something. And then the how to distinguish true desires is the issue. "True" meaning desires that are connected like you are posting.

Like if you told most people to eat what they want, they'd say "know I can't do that - I'll eat chocolate all day". But then the issue, again, is how to get to what one's true desire is. I'd say often our desires are not true, but don't know why. Maybe it's that we have become so disconnected to source that our desires aren't connected anymore. And that disconnection make us want something since we feel empty without being connected. But instead of finding a way to setting into source or Being, we grasp and desire all sorts of nutty things to try to fill our emptiness up.

So we are cut off from knowing our true desires, it seems? How to get that back? Do we just try to go for what we want and if it doesn't work or hurts lots of people, give it up? Like test the desire out and then if it passes the thought experiment test it in real life and let it fly or hit the fan, if it's not a true desire?

It is also a topic for what is one's purpose in life. For once one desires what is part of being connected to the whole, I like to think, you are living your life's purpose and are able to experience your own gifts or talents as being shared with people. or something like that. and it might not be easy to align with one's true purpose if you are stuck in some rut in some false desire - it might hurt to change that. so then we get stuck out of the fear of hurting self or others just to pursue what you really want.

[bellemeadows]

At the root of the 'desire' issue for me is whether one has the feeling of want / need or of have. To me, when focusing on a want or a need, I am coming from a very needy place. If I create in my experience more of what I focus on, then I would be creating more of the energy of need.

Need, as an energy, seems harsh and unyielding, not content and fulfilling. So if I want to live in harsh unyielding energy, the place to be is need. Since I don't want to live in harsh unyielding energy, I prefer to hang out with the energy of having. Have energy seems more fulfilled, more content -- not at all needy.

Bottom line, I see nothing unfun with desire, as long as one is not attached to the outcome to the point of being needy. That is, desire works for me, as long as it is coming from a place where I am feeling fulfilled, whether or not the desire is satisfied.

So thats it then -- just a few thoughts on desire. Blessings from Belle,