Thelema Revisited: A Critique
I am posting this for two reasons: lots of people seem to think I'm still a Thelemite and I wanted to explain why I no longer am. I have no interest in insulting anyone and I am happy for all those who find Thelema to be rewarding. At the moment, I don't have much time for drama, so I'm only willing to reply to thoughtful, even-handed comments. ( Read more... )
For me Thelemic thought as written by Crowley is a kind of poetic invocation pointing toward certain truths, and goading us along to tackle the Great Work for ourselves so we can figure out WTF it's all about.
Trying to find meaning is certainly a key area in spiritual life, and if Thelema helps someone do that, then great. Of course, I don't think AC had any special insight into the nature of reality or that his system leads to any profound truths (if anything, he was factually wrong about a lot of things). I've no doubt that many adherents experience a sense of profound truth, as do many dedicated Baptists and Scientologists, but science has never been able to show that such experiences have any referents in the real world. This doesn't mean that they can't have an impact on well-being, which can be a good thing, but it is also something of a trap within Thelema, since AC (along with many modern Thelemites) claimed that the system is in alignment with the natural world. Strictly for myself, the disconnect between Thelema and the natural world became too tenuous and finally broke....I chose to side with the universe as understood by our most reliable methods. As for where science cannot tread, I have decided to stop looking for answers where there are none and learn to experience the awe and wonder inherent in facing Mystery.
Absolute truth has nothing much to do with the relative truths of morals, ethics, ritual and culture - even "Thelemic culture." You have to stop taking it at face value and get with God until you can make up your own mind.
To my mind, this is a strike against Thelema. As a naturalist, I do not believe in any god, even an immanent one, nor in any purposive agent beyond biological creatures, nor in anything called Absolute Truth. Gods are anthropomorphic projections...as the saying goes, if a triangle had a god, it would have three sides. As for Absolute Truth, it's funny that it never explains anything or predicts anything; the mystical search for Absolute Truth would never have discovered even ordinary truths, like electrons or black holes. In fact, while ideas about Absolute Truth can be lovely and inspirational, they are never as surprising, elegant, or strange as what we find in the real world.
I think in some sense you're doing this, but it all seems stuck in the intellect.
Please don't mistake my rational articulations about religion with my personal spiritual experiences. Religious Naturalism has plenty of room for awe, wonder, and transcendence.
Fortunately I don't think there are very many "Thelemites" who treat religion as the shell of aggregates you describe.
This is why I wrote: "I want to reiterate that my critique has been aimed at the system of Thelema, not at individual Thelemites, who certainly hold a wide variety of interpretations of Crowley and his system. My object is not to admonish anyone or to somehow prove them wrong." I believe there are very few, if any, people who accept the entire system of Thelema without making their own changes. Of course, I argue that most Thelemites either make major changes to or ignore large swaths of Thelema because the system as given by AC is largely incoherent and in many areas outdated or even inhumane.
I'm certainly not trying to talk you out of your beliefs, I'm only explaining why I do not share them.
Reply
Likewise.
I don't know if I can explain briefly what I mean by Absolute Truth or God, except I can say that I don't mean something like you mentioned. The main point I wanted to make was that while I'm a Thelemite for certain very specific reasons, I also unapologeticly make major changes in my beliefs and practices not because AC was "incoherent" or "inhumane", he was certainly at times, that's actually not very important at all, I make changes to it because I have my own spiritual reality based on my own experiences and work. For me, these aren't actually conflicts with Thelema so much as the terms whereby any spiritual path becomes genuine.
Reply
This is one of the reasons I criticize those religions, including Thelema, that offer models of reality that differ from the natural sciences, because they take the mind away from what is authentic. I think an ideal spiritual system, whatever that might be, would be process oriented rather than ontological. Such a process might help one with self discovery, development of personal values and character, learning new skills and knowledge, opening the mind to new experiences, and offering a path to transcendent states if desired. This is an ideal, but something worth aspiring towards.
I suspect that many use Thelema as an outline for this kind of approach.
Reply
Leave a comment