Canons of Thelemic Philosophy and Religion

I have decided to rework the notes into a formal presentation of both Thelemic philosophy and systematic theology. It will take some time to get all the notes back up here and in a better format, but I think it'll worth the effort.

Go to Table of Contents

Introduction

What is labelled authentic Thelema in these pages is always rooted in a sense of immediacy, in a sense of movement, in a sense of becoming. While we cannot be indifferent to the past, to the unfolding from where we have been, nor to the future-embrace of the unknown before us, each generation of Thelemites is responsible for the stewardship of the Law that it has inherited.

Notice, though, that this does not start with “should be rooted” but “is always rooted.” It is not a prescriptive suggestion but a descriptive observation on Thelema. Likewise it must be remarked that authenticity neither demands nor prescribes an orthodoxy. While it does combat heresy, it does not antagonize heterodoxy either. This is the beginning of wisdom, the authenticity of the spirit over the legalism of the mind. Authenticity recognizes creativity in all its splendor while equally recognizing the difference between diversity and divergence.

This brings up terminological arguments. Such are a waste of time. Nothing good comes from such disagreements. So long as we understand each other, then nothing is so important in specific words that an argument is necessary over those words. I have specific notions in mind of the terms I use here. If you want to reserve those same terms for something else, there is certainly nothing wrong with that at all.

For instance, if you wish for the Holy Guardian Angel to mean some 10,000-year-old concept of an entity that sits on your shoulder giving business advice, then I am all for the Holy Guardian Angel being that entity. I will not argue that definition herein, so let’s not attempt to argue the definition together. However, I did not choose the definition of Holy Guardian Angel used herein by random. It is specific to the Thelemic nomenclature as defined by Crowley and used within an understanding of his corpus.

If you wish Magick to mean some kind of subjective practice in your head or on some invisible plane of existence, then I am all for Magick being entirely those things as well. I will not argue any of those definitions herein, so let’s not attempt to argue those definitions together. However, I did not choose the definition of Magick used herein by random. It is specific to the Thelemic nomenclature as defined by Crowley and used within an understanding of his corpus.

Let’s not stall the conversation over terminological differences.

The thesis presented here does not ride on your definitions, but Crowley’s definitions—and my use of them. As we move along, those definitions will be clearly provided and supported. There will be no ambiguity in the presentation. So let us move on to other objections than the meaning of words. They have already been provided for us.

Canons of Thelemic Philosophy and Religion is subtitled An Introductory Primer to the Law of Thelema. Why is that? Why is it an introductory primer? Do we need another introduction to the Law of Thelema?

Over the last decades a din has been raised against those who would speak clearly without diminution, those who would not sacrifice intelligence on the altars of pacification or profit. Many within the larger community of Thelema have skipped the first thousand years of depth and gone straight to the final hundred years of gimmicks, superficially, and loud accolades awarded for the intentional display of ignorance in an echo chamber.

We have not even scratched the introduction to the Law of Thelema.

On the surface, a primer is all about learning to read. So it is with Canons as well. All religion, philosophy, and science is about sign languages, cultural markers, and signifiers, all the components that make up language and communication. Indeed, all communication is about learning to use language to be understood. Several sections of Canons are devoted almost exclusively to this kind of discussion; but, for now, suffice to say that one of the greatest stumbling blocks of Thelema in the world today is a lack of grammatical understanding of the language of Thelema itself.

Intellectually anemic discussions aplenty revolve around terms such as Khabs and Khu, Holy Guardian Angel, Abyss, the “gods” and “goddesses” of Thelema, Kings and slaves, and even more without the first grasp of the grammar, the syntax, any of the language of Thelema. They are merely random words on a page used in a haphazard manner as if any reader should assume they mean something important or that they have even a “traditional” meaning within Thelema, but not really understanding such terms within context of the whole of the Law. Not helped by the continual reliance on Crowley’s Victorian mores, or his many attempts at transgression of them, the Thelemic community-at-large tends to err on the side of pontificating assumptions rather than digging deeper into the signifiers and meaning of the language with which we have been entrusted in the unfolding of this new aeon. Those times that we do find approachable attempts at dealing with the Law of Thelema, they are heavy with the baggage of Victorian occultism and so-called “Judeo-Christian”^[1] gnostic mysticism rather than any contextual association with civilization, society, or even the individual that makes up all of the above.

More to the point, the part of the language of Thelema that has been created around Crowley’s personal magical approach to the Law—rather than in the Law itself—is merely parroted by those looking for a countercultural rebellion under the Law rather than personal reconciliation through the Law.

At no point since Crowley’s reception of the Book of the Law has anyone published a systematic approach to the Law of Thelema as a relevant world scripture. In every claim of such this far, the result has been a nuanced and “magically delicious” perspective, marginalized to be swept under that exclusive rug called “Western Esotericism,” or some politically-contrived manifesto built on the regurgitated quotes of the Prophet. These attempts are as commendable as they are personal to those who write them. Yet they do not hold to any kind of recognizable religious or academic exegesis—even to Crowley’s own lackadaisical standards found in his Equinox of the Gods account.

This is where Canons takes a different approach. It takes the Book of the Law seriously as a world scripture on par with—if not even more important than—the Bible or the Qur’an or the Upanishads or any other sacred scripture of the world. It is not hidden behind winks and handshakes and sly smiles of an in-crowd. It pursues the mandate that “the Law is for all” and should be approached in just such a manner. It builds from the premise that exegesis is a science and an art—much like magick, indeed—and when done properly minimizes personal bias from the field of endeavor while recognizing that bias can never be fully eliminated. Canons does not shy away from difficult avenues of exploration or explanation. It works from the inside out, from the bottom up, and provides a solid foundation of discussion and progress in a modern world without denying the revelation or the mystery which the Book of the Law provides to those who seek such experiences.

This work is a beginner’s text but unlike any other introductory work that has come before. It assumes that you understand the basics of Thelema that have been explained in common by other authors relying on Crowley’s written work. For instance, you already know that Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law is the most oft quoted verse from the Book of the Law. Do we need to repeat it a thousand times more? Maybe so, yes. But I do not need to explain to you that θέλημα means Will. That much is clear through any cursory reading of Crowley, not to leave out expositions by Campbell, Del Campo, DuQuette, Gadbois, Grant, Jones, Kaczynski, Motta, Parsons, Regardie, Seckler, Shoemaker—and you can continue the list of those who have explained that little tidbit time and time again. While I may discuss further the nature of that Will, if I tell you that Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law is not the first axiomatic principle of Thelema—and show you why—then that is something you may not have considered before and you may take notice to hear me out for a while longer.

John Laurance, as the editor of a series of books on Catholic liturgy, writes, "Individual volumes [of the series] presuppose only a beginner's familiarity with Christian theology, such as that possessed by university upper-level undergraduate and master's level students”.^[2] I believe this quote provides the best perspective to my own work with Thelemic theology. Canons is intentionally a beginner’s work for Thelemites that doesn’t pretend to be a beginner’s work for the masses. I do not treat my readers as ignorant schoolchildren. I make no apology in that regard. I did not write this material with non-Thelemites in mind. It is not for them, per se, but for those both within and without our greater community who are looking deeper at our worldview as a legitimate source of existential understanding.

Philosophy is the love of wisdom and the pursuit of understanding the universe around us. It generally asks more questions than it answers while opening every door to seek truth and Truth together. It offers ideas and concepts to be explored rather than finality of assurances toward the questions it seeks and finds. Canons of Thelemic Philosophy and Religion is a playground of such searching for both the right questions and acceptable (though not always conclusive) answers to be mulled, considered, and debated further. If you find yourself agreeing with the material herein, that is well and good. If you find yourself questioning your own preconceived notions and well-meaning patterns of belief, that is all the better. Mission accomplished.

What is the Canons?

The Canons of Thelemic Philosophy & Religion (abbreviated as Canons) functions in three ways.

First, it is the foundational philosophical model for approaching the Law of Thelema in a balanced and applicable manner for all aspects of life.

Second, it is a robust systematic theology, a branch of theology "that attempts to present theological thinking and practice in an orderly and coherent way. It may be based on Scripture and expressed through doctrines. It implies an underlying philosophical frame of reference and a method to be followed."^[3]

Note: It should be pointed out that systematic theology is not a hierarchical presentation of doctrine itself, but a methodical and structured approach to scripture or divine revelation, such as the Law of Thelema, in a manner that is a pluralistic reflection of both scripture and tradition in light of contemporary questions, existential anxiety, and the human situation.

Finally, it functions as the foundation for a theoretical orientation as an approach to Thelemic Psychology and a Mental Health Counseling & Treatment programme (the alethiological cartography model).

A Note on the Intended Purpose and Audience of the Canons

This is not a comprehensive, verse-by-verse commentary on the Book of the Law . It does not attempt to resolve controversies or hierological debates of the community. Nor is this a formal philosophical treatise. It is designed specifically to be understood by the lay person with no formal philosophical or theological training.

If you are looking for unimpeachable answers—however you may define those—you are not going to find them here. What you will find is an approach, a system of examination of the core principles of the Law of Thelema as a whole through a specific methodology, i.e., an expedient manner of viewing the Law of Thelema informed by its foundational texts and seminal sign language. By its very nature, a systematic theology is incomplete. The systematic approach to the Law of Thelema can never hold all the answers since it only examines specific questions and concerns. It can, however, offer up a foundation on which to explore further those additional areas of lesser concern.

Disclaimer

There are no final answers when it comes to Thelema. Much of it is a personal engagement with both ourselves and the universe-at-large. However, Crowley reminds us the Law of Thelema revolutionizes "philosophy, religion, ethics and the whole nature of Man."^[4] We cannot sit back and pretend that Thelema affects only ourselves and our own personal perceptions. There are universals to be discussed, debated, and driven into the world as a change of underlying (aeonic) values affecting every man and every woman.

While this is certainly unfinished, this is also merely one perspective. I don't claim all of it to be novel or unique. I have stood on the shoulders of giants in all ways to get here. But it's time to stop playing footsies with our worldview, with our philosophy, and get busy seeing the change that will be when we apply the Law of Thelema in all areas of life, individually and collectively.

It is recommended that you read through in order of presentation. Getting through the systematic theology and psychology sections will be easier if you have a grounding in the philosophy section. For instance, understanding the Alethiological (Cartography) Model will be much easier if you have read both Epistemology and Metaphysics since the former is based on the latter.

Table of Contents

Part I: Thelemic Philosophy

Prologue: Foundations
Chapter 1: Epistemology
Chapter 2: Metaphysics
Chapter 3: Ethics
Chapter 4: Politics

Part II: Systematic Theology

Prolegomena
Chapter 1: Theology Proper
Chapter 2: Hierology
Chapter 3: Cosmology
Chapter 4: Anthropology
Chapter 5: Soteriology
Chapter 6: Ecclesiology
Chapter 7: Teleology
Chapter 8: Eschatology

Part III: Thelemic Psychology

Prologue: Theoretical Orientation
Chapter 1: Alethiological (Cartography) Model
Chapter 2: Spectrums of Consciousness
Chapter 3: Methodologies of Therapy

References

Attribution

No part of this publication may be used or redistributed for any purpose without the express prior written consent of the author.

Canons of Thelemic Philosophy & Religion © 1996-2024 by Qui Vident.

Comments

If you wish to comment about the materials here, feedback is welcome. Feel free to email questions, comments, and concerns regarding the Canons to curate@quivident.co.