Post a Comment On: Inner Pearls

There is a chapter in the book ‘A History of Philosophical Systems’, entitled ‘Kant’s Critical Philosophy’ by Newton P Stallknecht. Newton writes, “Two major themes persisted in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) summarised, in his own words, as the “starry heavens above and moral law within”. On the one hand, the physical universe of Copernicus, Kepler and Newton, infinite in extent and mathematically determined in detail, as in the calculable motions of the planets; On the other hand, the moral ideal of the autonomous human individual who can comprehend this order of nature and from within it, paradoxically enough, determine his own course of action by effective rational decision." 

Newton continues, "For Kant, nature and freedom, i.e. as he interpreted them, physical determinism and rational autonomy, stood in spectacular contrast and conflict … Kant’s chief speculative or constructive concern sprang from his desire to reconcile the scientific theories and ethical beliefs to which he was committed.” 

I am unfamiliar with Kant’s philosophical works, so have obtained a copy of ‘Critique of Judgment’ translated by Werner S Pluhar. In the foreword written by Mary J Gregor, she writes, “In his introduction to the third Critique (Critique of Judgment), Kant’s interest is primarily critical. On the basis of the first two Critiques, he acknowledges a ‘chasm’ between nature and freedom that is not to be bridged by way of theoretical cognition … not until nineteenth century idealism had run its course would it seem worthwhile to consider the more modest task Kant had set himself: that of making the transition, by way of reflective judgment and its principle of teleology, from our way of thinking about nature to our way of thinking about freedom.” 

I will return to Kant’s philosophy, but it might be pertinent to consider what is generally referred to as the nature of ‘free will’. Firstly, looking at some definitions of free will, it is described as ‘free and independent choice; voluntary decision; the doctrine that the conduct of human beings expresses personal choice and has not been determined or decided in advance by divine forces or any other power’.

It can be challenging to differentiate between historical trends of thinking that have concerned themselves with the nature of the human will and of knowledge in general; this pertains to what it is possible for a human being to know, the nature of that from which such information is derived and its relation to intentionality and action. The human being is complex in this respect, giving rise to contention which has prevailed and concerns itself with the realms of divinity, of nature and of extent of apparatus of governance and civil society.

‘Know thyself’ was inscribed into the forecourt of the ancient Temple of Apollo at Delphi. Socrates suggested that ‘the unexamined life is not worth living’: was he inferring that if a person is attentive to life (or mindful, as the Buddhists might suggest), that they will notice a vibrancy or vitality of life that is present? That to experience this (we could say ‘essence’ of life) is the value in living; paradoxically, it is not what life is able to offer or bring to a person by way of their experience, but is what a person is willing to bring to life in how open they are to its grace. Perhaps Socrates knew this and was encouraging for people to be willing to acknowledge their shadow and glimpse life as it is?

Kant had concerned himself with the relation of the physical universe (nature) and moral autonomy of the human (freedom of thought); science and ethics. His concern is still relevant: how do we discern freedom as it relates to the human will and of evolving consciousness that is awakening to itself i.e. to life and how does that change an individual's behaviour?

Wikipedia describes 'Thelema' as a social or spiritual philosophy developed in the early 1900s by Aleister Crowley, an English mystic and ceremonial magician. The word ‘thelema’ is the English transliteration of the Koine Greek noun θέλημα “will”, from the verb θέλω “to will, wish, want or purpose”. The ‘Law of Thelema’ is a fundamental tenet of the philosophy which is, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law”. The corresponding phrase is “Love is the law, love under will”. Other phrases associated with Thelema are, “It is the mark of the mind untrained to take its own processes as valid for all men, and its own judgments for absolute truth”, and “For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect.” 

The entry continues to inform  that “In the Thelemic worldview or model, each person has a ‘True Will’ and (insofar as each person acts in accordance with his or her Will) the nature of a person’s interactions with the world (or universe) is a form of love or harmony … ‘every man and every woman is a star’, which portrays the distinct nature of every individual as residing in a non-overlapping point of space and time; collisions between different persons being infrequent if each is aware of—and acting in accordance with—their true purpose in life.” 

The reference to a person’s interactions with the world (or universe) as a ‘form of love or harmony’ is interesting, so too is the reference to ‘every man and woman as a star’. I am aware that as Crowley developed his philosophy or religion, he borrowed concepts from mysticism and the esoteric (in particular the Kabbalah). I am not a student of Thelema, so have only a cursory familiarity with its tenets, but I would like to explore some of what has been revealed, particularly as I sense that it will be of assistance to me as I begin to navigate through Kant’s philosophical works.

Thelema allows for a trio of deities (Nuit, Hadit and Ra-Hoor-Khuit) who have been adapted from ancient Egyptian religion and are denoted as the three speakers of the ‘Book of the Law’; (incidentally, it is interesting that there is a ‘trine aspect’ to this religion, given as in my previous blog I had touched upon Pythagoras’ teaching of the Oneness as trine; also with the myth of Isis, Osiris and Horus).

The Wikipedia article informs that Nuit is the feminine aspect of the triad and has several titles, including the ‘queen of the infinite space’, ‘our lady of the stars’ and ‘lady of the starry heaven’.

Hadit is the masculine aspect of the triad and has the title, ‘the Great God, the Lord of the Sky’. He is depicted on the ‘Stele of Revealing’ in the form of the ‘winged disk of the sun’, Horus of Behdet(y)/Behdeti.

The third aspect, Heru-ra-ha (literally ‘Horus (Hadit) sun-flesh’) is a composite of two (given that it is active and passive, there is a suggestion that it is androgynous). The first component, which is active, is Ra-Hoor-Khuit; other references include Ra-Har-Akht, Egyptological pronunciation: Ra-Horakhty or Ra-Herakhty (Horus of the Akhet), ‘Ra (who is) Horus on the Horizon’. He is the ‘Lord of the Aeon’ and the ‘Crowned and Conquering Child’. Hoor-pa-kraat is the passive component; it means, ‘Horus the Child’, distinguished from Horus the Elder, who was the old patron deity of Upper Egypt; it is representative of the newborn sun, rising each day at dawn. The Egyptological pronunciation is Har-pa-khered, commonly referred to by the Greek rendering Harpocrates.

Essentially, Nuit represents the infinitely-expanding circle whose circumference is unmeasurable and whose centre is everywhere. Hadit represents the point in the centre of the circle, the axle of the wheel, the cube in the circle, the ‘flame that burns in every heart of man, and in the core of every star’ … When juxtaposed with Nuit in the Book of the Law, Hadit represents each ‘unique point experience’. These point-experiences in aggregate comprise ‘Nuith’, the sum of all possible experience.

What does Crowley mean when he refers to ‘every man and woman as a star’? He said that the five-pointed ‘star of flame’ symbolises Ra-Hoor-Khuit in certain contexts. Given that Thelema is essentially ‘Will’, is Crowley indicating that the human expression, essentially all of its choices that are being made in space-time, could be viewed as trails of flame that are moving to and from its source or point of origin whilst in accordance with natural order?

Whilst form and language does differ, there is a ‘sameness of expression’ that is evident in Crowley’s teaching with what can be known of the religion of ancient Egypt, the Kabbalah (which goes into detail regarding every expression of the flame) and the work of many theologians, philosophers and physicists. Humans have looked up at the night sky for thousands of years and in a spirit of reverence, have marvelled at the magnificence of the constellations. Why is it then, that when they look outwards at themselves and form judgments, for the most part they find themselves wanting and struggle with acknowledging the tenet of ‘as above, so below’?