Your duty to Mankind
Establish the law of Thelema as the sole basis of conduct
According to this essay, we have just one duty to mankind, but it is a big one: Establishing the law of Thelema as the sole basis of conduct for us as individuals, and also for society at large as represented in our civil government and criminal justice system. This is a tall order, and there are many different aspects to consider about how to implement such a change.
The basic premise under which we could establish Thelema as a broadly accepted social system is that the Law of Thelema must be known, understood, and accepted by a majority of the population. Everyone must be a Thelemite, or at least have a passing understanding of the Law of Thelema: Do what thou wilt. Or, more generally at the very least, they must understand and accept the concept of Will as it relates to personal responsibility. Without this most basic premise being fulfilled, it would seem almost impossible to implement any of the subsequent changes.
To this extent, the first step would seem to be that of promulgation. Getting the word of the New Aeon out to the masses has been happening for the past 120 years since it was received by Aleister Crowley, but progress has been slow. Thelema has been obscured from view by the mystery cults who up until now have been charged with conveying its message. The prophet and herald of Thelema was himself branded an outcast and heretic, and he remains largely misunderstood. Our work would seem to be cut out for us, and I think that there is much to be done in this area to bring the Law and its message of universal freedom to a broader public audience. Once public understanding is achieved, there would be a possibility for broad acceptance of the changes necessary for establishing Thelema as the sole basis of conduct.
Establishing a theocracy based on Thelema seems unlikely, even undesirable, but in essence that is what we are talking about here. Theocracies tend to promote efficiency of organization and unity, but usually this comes at the cost of individual freedoms and diversity. The latter would seem to be at odds with the tenets of Thelema. For this discussion, I am choosing to separate the ecclesiastical theology of Thelema from the pragmatic pursuit of individual Will, for it is under its secular and practical principles that a Thelemic form of government would best function.
On its surface, the revision of all civil and criminal laws to conform with the Law of Thelema would seem to be an Herculean task, simply because there are so many laws on the books. Every statute and law in each township, province, city, county, and country would be reviewed and either rewritten or deleted according to its relevance to the Law. A more practical approach might be to write a new constitution based on the Law of Thelema that sets the rights of the individual according to Will at the forefront and that document would control the interpretation and implementation of existing and future laws. The existing governance might remain in place, being upheld and enforced by the new formula. Ownership of property, for example, would continue as-is based on existing accounting and paperwork. Business would continue to function as it has, but with new attention paid to the Law of Thelema as its standard of conduct. The revision of a constitution of the government may be only slightly less of an ungainly task than a full revision of laws, but it would at least set the Law of Thelema as the foundation.
Upholding and protecting the rights of the individual must be the stated purpose of the government. Jack Parsons wrote about this in “Freedom is a Two Edged Sword,” and it may be useful to quote some of that here.
“The state exists for the primary purpose of protecting the rights of the individual. Where it fails to fulfill this purpose it is no more than anarchy or tyranny. All other functions of the state are subordinate to this fundamental purpose.
“In the machinery provided for the function of the state, basic frameworks must be provided to safeguard the rights
Of weaker men against stronger men
Of individuals against groups
Of smaller groups against larger groups
Of individuals and groups against the state.”
Liber OZ is another foundational listing of the rights of the individual and could be used as source material for a new bill of rights or constitution. Both of these documents have a lot to say about the responsibility that goes along with individual rights based on Will.
Another objective of the government in protecting and enforcing the rights of the individual would be dealing with crime. This would call for an overhaul of the criminal justice system because we would necessarily redefine what we consider to be crime according to the law of Thelema. The Book of the Law states: “The word of sin is restriction”, and based on that and the concept of Will, any restriction of individual liberty or of a person’s Will is going to be a crime. Anything that falls outside this broad definition is not strictly considered to be a crime.
A Thelemic justice system would work both to uphold the rights of an individual and to prevent crime, i.e. anything which restricts an individual’s freedom to do their Will. Crowley gives us some examples of how crime restricts the victim’s freedom: Murder restricts the right to live; robbery restricts the right to security, and so on. We can think of other examples that include discrimination, violence, injury, death, fraud, loss, and property damage. These are broad categories by which offenses can be identified based on the actions of those who would try to restrict another’s freedom to be, to write, to move, to do as they Will.
Many of the criminal offenses we see today would become obsolete when we view crime in terms of Will and individual duty to others. Sex work, or the possession and use of certain drugs are examples of activities that are currently illegal in many places. Unjust laws can easily create criminals out of persons who are simply doing their Will. Such “artificial crimes” spring directly from laws that are meant to control a population that is otherwise assumed to have no self control. Furthermore, such laws are often based on the arbitrary rules of moral behavior coming from whichever group is in power at any given time. When the rule of law is founded on Will and individual freedom, and people conduct their lives according to the discipline of Thelema, much of the so-called crime we experience today would disappear.
Preventing crime would rely largely on the widespread education of the people about their duty to themselves, their duty to others, and a general understanding of the effect that any action against the Will of another has upon their own Will. The Law of Thelema would be reinforced in daily life, at home, in temples, and in schools. Ideally, each citizen is observing their duty to themselves already. They are following their Will in their daily lives, and that includes the injunction against interfering with someone else’s Will. With those boundaries in place, crime would only surface as the infractions against natural rights that we all have as individuals. In theory, crime becomes less frequent, more obvious and easier to identify and punish when it does occur.
Crime should have consequences. Swift punishment as a consequence of crime is designed to further prevent crimes. Crowley suggests that criminals should be segregated from society for a time. Prisons have been used for centuries for this purpose, and without doubt prisons would have a place in a Thelemic criminal justice system. Crowley even suggests that there should be prison “settlements” where prisoners can make up and enforce their own rules of law to get a taste for what it takes to impose rules and order on a population. Remote island prisons have been implemented in the past and are not beyond the scope. One could even imagine a future where humans establish “Escape from New York” scenarios, or even off-world prison colonies on moons and asteroids to segregate those who cannot behave correctly.
Punishment would also prevent future crime in the way the sentence is handed down and carried out. Crowley says that criminals have magically declared that another’s rights do not exist, so the punishment must make that true for them as well. The example he gives is that the thief is outlawed and so is made to feel insecure about the safety of his own possessions. This is one example, but we can extrapolate to other crimes from there. No matter the offense, the specific sentence should take a form that enforces a restriction on the criminal that is similar to the one they imposed on their victim. The criminal should be made to understand that not only was their crime a violation of their victim’s Will, but it was truly an infraction against their own Will. There could also be a service aspect to the punishment, so that those who commit fraud, for example, might be compelled to provide substantial aid and physical assistance to victims of similar crimes. The criminal justice system would be set up to determine the possible punishments that would fit the crime and be commensurate with the level of injustice that was originally caused by the criminal.
Justice would be administered by judges who are uniquely qualified by their training, knowledge, and experience to determine guilt or innocence based on the principles of Thelema. The qualifications could include years working in a Thelemic initiatory system, achieving Knowledge and Conversation, ordination in sacerdotal roles, published dissertations on Holy Texts, and other types of experience. Judges would be known and broadly respected for their uprightness and discretion. And most importantly, they would be highly skilled in applying the abstract principles of the Law of Thelema to the known facts of the cases that came before them. In short, it would be their Will to serve.
Ultimately, the aim and function of the judiciary would be three-fold. First, the courts would ensure that society maintains conscience-guided conduct that is based on Thelemic and scientific principles. Second, they would act as a monitor of public behavior. And third, they would enforce and protect the governmental guarantees of individual liberty for all.
Let’s pause here for a moment. With all this theory about how a Thelemic society might work, how laws might be upheld and enforced, we have ventured pretty far from our original duty, that is, our duty as individuals to establish the Law of Thelema and make it the sole basis of conduct. The larger view of a Thelemic society is all a pipe dream unless we forge a new social contract with others at a personal level that incorporates Thelema and True Will in our everyday life.
This goes back to the point about promulgation and making Will a part of the conversations we have outside of our Thelemic circles. Almost no one outside the occult community knows or cares about the Book of the Law or True Will or Crowley or Magick. That is not likely to change any time soon.
But as Thelemites, we can interact with our friends, family, neighbors, co-workers, employees, bosses, and government representatives in ways that reflect our understanding of Will. We can make choices in our lives that align with our Will, and with conscious attention to our duty to ourselves and our duty to others. We can express our choices with words that carry the spirit of Thelema without the need to recruit anyone into a new religion or a mystery school. This is not to say that we should hide our esoteric studies, beliefs in the occult, or magical practices if putting those things forward is our Will. Rather, in broad strokes it seems more fruitful and efficient to be living examples of our truth without having to preach the Law to those who have no interest. People might quickly get behind a point of view that upholds personal responsibility and that respects the rights and integrity of others. They can easily understand a philosophy that empowers people to set boundaries and stand up for themselves. The Law is for all, even when they don’t know it.