Thelema, clarification question

[Agaliha]

I read this:



The theology of Thelema postulates all manifested existence arising from the interaction of two cosmic principles: the infinitely extended, all-pervading Space-Time Continuum; and the atomic, individually expressed Principle of Life and Wisdom. The interplay of these Principles gives rise to the Principle of Consciousness which governs existence. In the Book of the Law, the divine Principles are personified by a trinity of ancient Egyptian Divinities: Nuit, the Goddess of Infinite Space; Hadit, the Winged Serpent of Light; and Ra-Hoor-Khuit (Horus), the Solar, Hawk-Headed Lord of the Cosmos.
The Thelemic theological system utilizes the divinities of various cultures and religions as personifications of specific divine, archetypal and cosmic forces. Thelemic doctrine holds that all the diverse religions of Humanity are grounded in universal truths; and the study of comparative religion is an important discipline for many Thelemites.
(here (http://www.religioustolerance.org/thelema1.htm))


Still slightly confused. _inabox_ I just want to make sure.

How exactly does Thelema view the gods?
Are they symbols, personifications and archetypes (not literal)? [I kept seeing 'archetype' mentioned in various sites and this perked my interest]
Or literal gods and goddesses like in neo-Paganism?

I've read some stuff about Nuit and I must say...very interesting.

Thanks!

[morganxpage]

The answer is yes. :hahugh:

To elaborate a bit, in Thelema (or, at least, my understanding of Thelema) Gods are thought of both microcosmically (as archetypes/thought-forms/psychological constructs) AND Macrocosmically (as personifications of REAL energies and beings). For example, Nuit, Hadith, and Horus are the microcosmic masks for the Macrocosmic forces they represent.

[Agaliha]

The answer is yes. :hahugh:
To elaborate a bit, in Thelema (or, at least, my understanding of Thelema) Gods are thought of both microcosmically (as archetypes/thought-forms/psychological constructs) AND Macrocosmically (as personifications of REAL energies and beings). For example, Nuit, Hadith, and Horus are the microcosmic masks for the Macrocosmic forces they represent.

Wow, someone finally answered! :fpraise:
So they're archetypes, psychological constructs and personifications of an energy greater than themselves (is it a god, spirit or just energy?).
Does one have to believe in god(s) to be follow Thelema, could one be agnostic or atheist and see Nuit as a symbol of the universe (pantheistic view: no literal gods, nature and the universe is divine)?
:spaceman:

[morganxpage]

There are many Thelemites who are agnostic or atheists. These people tend to just view everything microcosmically.

Nuit, Hadith, and Horus tend to usually be recognized as symbols. Very powerful symbols. Other beings such as Aiwaz, Babalon, etc., have been refered to as "discarnate intelligences" by Crowley, which places them firmly in the Macrocosmic territory. But don't just start believing in any of this! In Thelema, you MUST do the work AND THEN decide for yourself. Besides, Crowley was either kidding or outright lying half the time, so you've got to do the work just to sort the grain from the chaff. :lol:

[Agaliha]

Does anyone have any thing else to share about this? I totally forgot about this question until I came across a site talking about Nuit and it once again perked my interest.

Thelema is interesting to me, but I have a hard time following it _inabox_

[sidhe]

Nuit, Hadit, and RHK are philosophical constructs to explain the core of Thelema in spiritual terms. Nuit is the expanse of space and potential in which we all exist, Hadit is us - the moments of flame within that space, and Ra-Hoor-Khuit appears in all the moments where we experience some small part of the expanse of space and potential. In other words, Nuit is potential experience, Hadit is the potential experiencer, and RHK is the moment of experience where Nuit and Hadit become one. Or, in other words, Hadit is will, Nuit is love, and RHK is love under will.

Babalon is...gah. Read Jack Parsons' works. She's something akin to the ultimate feminine deity who behaves like the ultimate male deity - she's aggressive, active, passivity, if that makes a lick of sense. Similarly, Therion is the masculine force behaving as feminine - passive active energy, submitted to Babalon.

Babalon also, according to some folks, fits into the YHWH formula as Heh Final. Those who plug her into a Gnostic Christianity argue that the Trinity is failed, and the Quadrinity (Father (male, Y), Holy Spirit/Mother (Female, H), Son (Male, W), and Daughter (Female, H)) is the actual formula for the existence of deity, with the Daughter (Babalon) acting as a second path to salvation via non-traditional means.

Having said all that: I've done evocation/invocation work with Nuit, and she has taken on an existence outside of an archetypal construct, but she's very alien and distant. Babalon is much more accessible (y'know, being a whore and all ;)) and much more concrete...and she has a taste of her mother about her.