THE ARCANE TEACHINGS/PART 4

 

Part IV.

Fate or Freedom?

Lesson X. Fate and Destiny. Lesson XI. Law, Order, and Sequence. Lesson XII. Dominant Desire and Sovereign Will.

 

 

 

 

 

Lesson X.

Fate  and  Destiny.

From the earliest days of philosophical reasoning, metaphysical speculation, and theological dogmatism, the great questions regarding Fate or Freedom have formed an important feature of controversy. In many forms, and in manifold guises, has this great question presented itself for consideration by the human mind. Backward and forward has this tennis-ball of thought been tossed, victory being claimed by all  parties engaging in the game of discussion. Early philosophy was concerned with the question of Fate and Destiny vs. Freedom, and able thinkers arrayed themselves on the respective sides of the question. Metaphysics joined in the controversy with subtle and hair-splitting definitions, theories, explanations, and conceptions. Theology took an active interest in the fray, its particular tennis-ball being called Predestination, Foreordination, or  Predetermination. Modern Science  has now entered the field and her advanced thinkers insist upon the truth  of the principle of Determination (but not pre-Determination) by Natural Laws, which applies to all branches of science, and is seen in operation in all the fields of universal activity, physical and psychical.

The Arcane Teaching holds as Truth the idea that every thing and all things—every event and all events—are governed by Law. That every thing and every event is under Law, Order, and Sequence. That there is no such thing as Chance. That every event is a link in the Cosmic Sequence of events. That every thing is a part of, and not apart from, the Whole Thing. That every event is a part of, and not apart from, the Whole Event. That nothing “happens” without precedent causal events proceeding regularly and in logical sequence. That there are no “accidents,” or events outside of the regular order. Hearing these statements, the student will feel impelled to ask the inevitable question: “Is this Reign of Law, Order, and Sequence, but another name for the old fetish of Fate, Destiny, or Predestination? Are we then ruled by arbitrary Fate—governed by the decree of Destiny? Are all events Preordained, Predetermined, and Predestined ?” And this question must be met—and shall be met—not ignored and evaded as is customary in so many of the teachings, philosophies, and theologies. Let us consider the matter in the light of the Arcane Teachings. Listen to the Aphorism:

Aphorism xvi. Know ye, that Fate is but the distorted image of Law, Order, and Sequence. The wise know that Fate, if existent, would be an exception to Law—a twin-error to Chance. Law there is; Order there is; Sequence there is—but Fate there is not. Fate, Destiny, and Predestination would imply the existence of Decree and Foreknowledge in the Cosmic Mind. There is no such Decree; no such Foreknowledge. When the Cosmic Mind “knows” a thing or event, it knows according to Law, and the knowing and the manifestation are simultaneous. Fate,  Destiny, and  Predestination,  are  but  names  for  half-truths—imperfect visions of Law, Order, and Sequence.

Although to the average mind there appears to be but slight connection between the idea of Fate or Destiny and that of the foreknowledge and decree of Deity, still the former ideas have had their birth in the latter. Back of the fundamental conception of Fate or Destiny one always finds the shadowy form of some Supernatural Being who decrees the Fate or Destiny. In the old mythologies the gods decreed the fate and destinies of mortals, and all cosmic happenings, the details and working out of the plan being left in the hands of minor supernatural beings, such as the Parcæ, Fates, or Destinies, who were goddesses believed to preside over the birth, life, and fortunes of men. In the Grecian and Roman mythologies these Fates were three in number, Clotho who held the spindle, Lachesis who drew out the thread of men’s destiny, and  Atropos  who cut it off. The Supernatural Being, or beings, always promulgated the decree of Fate or Destiny. Fate was never a matter of natural law  and order, but always the working out of an arbitrary decree, or divine fiat. This idea is seen to be correct by reference to the definitions of the terms as given by the best authorities. Consider the following definitions:

Destiny: “The power which presides over the lot or fortune of men; the fate, lot, doom, or fortune appointed, allotted, or predetermined for each person or thing; the ultimate fate of a person; etc.”

Fate: “The decree of God by which the course of events is fixed; a fixed destiny depending upon a superior cause, and uncontrollable by man; appointed lot; doom; inevitable destiny; etc.”

Fatalism: “The doctrine that all things are ordered for men by the arbitrary  decrees  of God.…It  is  carried  out to  its  most pitilessly logical extreme among the  Mohammedans,  where everything that can happen is ‘kismet’, or Fate.…in theology it has given birth to theories of Predestination.” (By some writers the term is used also as synonymous with “Determinism,” which is the scientific doctrine of causation, continuity, etc., from natural causes. This usage of the term is misleading, and is historically incorrect.)

Predestination: “The act of appointing beforehand by irreversible decree or unchangeable purpose; the act of foreordaining, decreeing, beforehand, or predetermining events; the purpose of God from eternity respecting all events;” as, “God’s infallible providence and predestination” (Joyce); and, “If God pre sees events, he must have predetermined them” (Hale); also, as “By the decree of God for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels  are  predestined  unto everlasting life, and others  foreordained  to everlasting death. These angels and men are predestinated and foreordained.” (Westminster Confession  of  Faith.)

So, it may be seen, that the decree of a Supernatural Being is always back of, under, and in, all true conceptions of Fate, Destiny, Predestination, etc. These ideas cannot be divorced— they stand and fall together.

One of the main points of difference between the opposing conceptions of Law, Order, and Sequence, and of Fate, Destiny and  Predestination, is seen to be in  the  assumption  and  denial of the Divine foreknowledge, and decree. Fatalism holds that some Supernatural Being has foreknowledge, and exercises arbitrary decrees determining all events, including the fate or destiny of mankind, as a race and individually. The theory of Law, Order and Sequence, on the contrary discards the idea of foreknowledge, and denies the arbitrary decree and fore-determination. Instead, it holds that the Cosmic Activities, and the incidental events, proceed regularly, orderly, and in sequence, from and by reason of the operation of Natural Laws. The Arcane Teachings hold that these Natural Laws are superimposed by, and are reflections of, The Absolute Law— the Efficient Reason of the Cosmos. The modern scientific schools of Determinism agree with the Arcane Teaching so far as the idea of determination by Natural Laws is concerned, but differ from it by holding that The Law is but a name which may be applied to the sum total of Natural Laws.

Another great point of difference between Fatalism and the Arcane Teaching is, that Fatalism insists upon  arbitrary happenings and events, unrelated to, and in spite of, natural law and order. Fatalism denies that  preceding  events  have  any relation to the “fated happening,” and holds that the latter would have happened in spite of any precedent event. In short, Fatalism makes the “fated happening a thing standing apart from the Chain of Sequence—something resulting from arbitrary and independent decree. Thus, Fatalism holds that one’s death, for instance, is “fated” (decreed) to happen in a certain way, at a certain time, and at a certain place, irrespective of the Law and Order of the Cosmos. Fatalism carried to an extreme shows the fallacy of the idea, as for instance the Mohammedan who refuses to allow his wound to be treated for the reason that if he is fated to die of the wound he will die, and if fated to live then he will recover without treatment. Or, the fanatics who refuse to run from a wild beast, on the same grounds. Or those who refuse to rescue a drowning man, lest they interfere with Fate.

The following quotation from the article on Fatalism, contained in the New International Encyclopædia, will show the distinctive points between the teachings of Fatalism and those of the scientific school of Determinism, which latter agrees in many important essentials with the Arcane Teaching. The writer of the article says, in part: Fatalism is “the doctrine that the course of events is so determined that what an  individual wills can have no great effect on that course. Fatalism must be carefully distinguished from Determinism, as the confusion of these  two conceptions has been responsible for much of the popular prejudice existing against Determinism. Fatalism, as has been said, denies that  Will has efficacy in shaping events. Determinism maintains that this causally efficient will is itself to be casually accounted for; this is entirely different from the fatalistic assertion that Will counts for nothing. In fact Determinism and Fatalism are  fundamentally  antagonistic. Determinism asserts that events are determined by some of the events that  immediately  precede  them;  that  if  the  latter  were different the former would be different.  Fatalism denies that immediately preceding events have anything to do with the origination of events immediately following: It asserts that the latter would occur even if the former were changed.…To say that one’s death is fixed by Fate is to deny that it takes place by natural law. Or, more accurately, it is to say that however much one varies the cause, one cannot vary the effect.…The fatalist’s position is that the end is predetermined, but not the means; the determinist’s position is that the events now occurring lead by causality to other  events, which are thus fixed because their causes are actually existent. Or, to put it still another way, for the fatalist what actually determines the event is not another event immediately  preceding,  but  some mysterious decree issued by some mysterious agent ages before the event. This enables us to see that Fatalism gives no scope to the will. But Determinism, which merely asserts that every event has its determining conditions in its immediate antecedents, includes among the antecedents the human Will.…Thus Determinism is consistent with a belief in the efficiency of Will, and Fatalism is not.”

In short, Determination holds that events are Determined— Fatalism holds that they are Predetermined. The one recognizes Natural Laws as the determining power—the other holds that Supernatural Decree predetermines and foreordains.

Predestination is Fatalism carried to its logical conclusion; Predestination holds that God appoints and determines beforehand by irreversible decree or unchangeable purpose— arbitrarily and irrevocably predetermines—the events of the universe, first and last, great and small, in general and in detail. Not only the universe as it is at present, but as it must have been forever through all eternity, and as it will be forever through all eternity. If the Divine Fiat has so gone forth, then everything is predetermined, and the Eternal Universe is but an automaton registering the Divine Decree, down to the minutest detail. In this case, everything, indeed, is caused by “the Will of God.”

Theologians endeavor to escape from the above conclusion by a flow of words—like the cuttle-fish they darken the waters of thought by the flow of dark, unintelligible words, and thus make their logical escape. But a plain consideration of the facts of the proposition, laying aside theological subtleties—a consideration in the light of Common Sense—shows us that admitting a Personal Deity,  possessing  All-Wisdom  and All-Power, then Predestination must be a logical result. Let us examine the statement.

If Deity be All-Wise, (Omniscient), then he must know all things, absolutely, truly, infallibly—all things, past, present, and future. He must know the subsequent results of all actions— the subsequent effects of all causes, the operation of all laws. He would not be able to make mistakes of judgment, or errors of foresight. There could be no necessity for any changing of his mind, if his wisdom is absolute. He must possess perfect and infallible Foresight, Foreknowledge, and Prescience, which means: “The quality of having knowledge of, or foresight into, events before they take place.” And if he so knows what will take  place, and  his knowledge be true, perfect and infallible (and it must be so to be  absolute) then these foreseen, and foreknown, events  must take place and occur. As Hale well says: “If  God pre-sees events, he must have  predetermined them.”  If this be not so, then the absolute qualities attributed to Deity are false and non-existent, or the terms are meaningless.

Moreover, if the All-Wise knows  what will happen (and this he must know if he be All-Wise) then even his All-Power cannot change the things that he knows to a certainty. Some theologians, wishing to escape from this dilemma, have held that his All-Power may  overcome his All-Knowing, and thus take away his infallible Foresight, Foreknowledge, and Prescience—but this is childish, for Absolute Knowledge could not be destroyed, impaired, inhibited, or changed. Deity must be held to be either absolute or not absolute. If he is absolute, the above facts must be assumed to be correct—if he is not, then we must go behind and beyond him for the true Absolute.

Moreover, if such a Deity  exists, he must have  made  the laws of the universe, for there could have been nothing else to have made them,  and  if  they  existed  without  his  making,  then  such a Deity would not be absolute. If he made them, then he must have set them in motion, and kept them in motion ever since. And, if so, then he must be held responsible for all that happens, or can possibly happen, under them—they are his own creation, and he is their Cause, and the Cause of all that proceeds from them. Moreover his All-Knowing must have made him  fully aware  of all the possibilities and certain effects of the operation of these laws. There is no escape from this conclusion. No wonder that old Omar raised his voice in indignant protest against this conception when  accompanied  by  the “bribe of  heaven and threat of hell” as a reward or punishment for doing that which must be inevitable because it has been predestined by Deity. The conception of a Personal Deity, or Personal Supreme Being, absolute in nature, who created the universe and its laws, must carry with it as a logical accompaniment the conceptions of Foresight, Foreknowledge, and Predestination—which are but newer names for the old fetish of Fate and Destiny. In this is found the paradox of theology, from which it can never escape, and which it has never been able to reconcile.

But the Arcane Teaching does not hold to Decree and Foreknowledge, either in a Personal Deity or in the Cosmic Mind. Its Aphorism denies the “existence of Decree and Foreknowledge in the Cosmic Mind.” It says that “When the Cosmic Mind ‘knows’ a thing or event, it knows according to Law, and the knowing and the manifestation are simultaneous.” For when the Cosmic Brain  “thinks” or “knows” a thing or event—then the  “thought” becomes a thing or event, and is actually manifested. The Cosmic Mind knows only what is existent, for what it  knows is manifested because of the knowing. And  what  it  knows,  it  knows  because  of  the  manifestation. In the Cosmic Mind, knowing and manifestation are identical— simultaneous—one. The Cosmos is the only Being that  exists and can know the Cosmic Activities. Other than itself there is naught but The  Law, which is above Being, and above Knowing, and above Action, as we know those terms. Any attempt  to  attribute  to The  Absolute the qualities, attributes, and properties of Man, inevitably results in postulating a Personal Deity, whose All-Knowledge is the  Predestination of the Universe—whose will, decree, and fiat, is Fate. And in that case upon that Deity must be placed the responsibility for  everything  that  happens  in the universe. In that event, then indeed we may say with the poet: “His the credit; His the blame; His the glory; His the shame.” In the place of Fatalism, Destiny, and Predestination, the Arcane Teaching offers the Orderly Trend  under  Cosmic  Laws inherent within the Cosmos, proceeding as Law, Order and Sequence. Not the result of arbitrary fiat or decree, but the result of natural laws proceeding in regular order, as the Cosmos evolves  toward Cosmic Consciousness and All-Knowledge. When the Cosmos is resolved into Infinite Nothingness, then we find naught existent but The Law. And The Law is the only thing left upon which to fix the Final Blame—if blame there be. Fix it so, if you will. If it belong to The Law—give to It Its own. But The  Law is no Person—no Being—It is Absolute Law—constant, unchanging, invariable, eternal. In Law we find the only refuge in our highest flights of thought, reason, or imagination. It is not a Law Giver—it is Law in Itself.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lesson XI.

Law, Order, and Sequence.

We live in a Cosmos governed by Laws existent by reason of the very being of the Cosmos and the existence of The Law. There is no blind Chance, nor Arbitrary Decree in the Cosmos. There is no place or room for these for Law fills the whole field of Cosmic Activity. There is no Disorder, or Inharmony. Everything is in Balance. Chaos does not exist. From The  Law  proceeds the Seven Cosmic Laws, which in turn are  subdivided  into  seven;  and  these  into  seven; and so on, the septenary division and subdivision extending into the Infinitessimal. But in large and in small—and both are alike—there is ever Law and Order, Continuity and Sequence, Manifesting and in full operation.

And, over all is The  Law of Laws—Absolute—Alone!

As the mists of the morning disappear before the rays of the rising sun, so will the superstitions, fables, and dogmas be dissipated by the knowledge of universal natural law and order. In a universe governed by eternal laws and Cosmic order there is no place for the Fates; the Destinies; the Arbitrary Decrees; of the fables, folk-lore and legends, even though they be covered by the robes of philosophy or theology. Before the light of Reason, these things must melt away, when the Truth is seen, the half-truths disappear. Fate, Predestination, and Chance— Threefold Error—flee before the conception of Law and Order in the Cosmos. Listen to the Aphorism:

Aphorism xvii. Know ye that, under The  Law, the Cosmos is governed by Law. Each and every thing, and all things, proceed in Orderly Trend. In the Cosmos there is no Chance; no Disorder; no Inharmony. The Three Principles—Substance, Motion, and Consciousness are equally under Law. Those who teach otherwise, err.

This statement agrees with the report of the reason of the most advanced minds of the race, past and present. Every intelligent conception of the Cosmos must of necessity include the conception of Law. Without this inherent indwelling Law, the Cosmos could not exist—the Cosmos  would be Chaos. The very origin of the term “Cosmos” shows the underlying thought in the minds of the ancient Greek philosophers who first used it. The word itself is derived from the archaic Greek word komeo, “to take care of,” and the early Greek philosophers used it first in the sense of “order,” and later in the broader sense of “the world or universe, from its perfect order and arrangement, as opposed to Chaos.” Its use as “the World-Soul” came later, and included the earlier conceptions. Its antithesis the word “Chaos”—has two meanings, viz.: (1) “A yawning empty space”; and (2) “Confusion; or, a mass of matter in confusion without order or laws; a confused mixed, mass, without order or regularity.” In both of these usages, Chaos is absolutely opposite in meaning to Cosmos. When we postulate a Cosmos without Law and Order, we are simply applying the term to what is really Chaos—either a Nothing, or else an Orderless Universe. Order always implies the existence of Law—the two are inseparable. There can be no such thing as an universe half Cosmos and half Chaos. Order and Chaos are antithetical. Law and Chance are antithetical. One annuls the other—they cannot exist at the same time. The three Primary Axioms of Logic show us this fact. Let us consider them for a moment:

I. The Axiom of Identity: “The same quality or thing is always  the  same  quality or thing, no matter how different  the conditions in which it occurs.”

II. The Axiom of Contradiction: “No thing can at the same time and place both be and not be.”

III. The Axiom of Excluded Middle: “Everything must either be or not be; there is no other alternative or middle course.”

These are established axioms of Logic. A leading authority, Prof. Jevons, says of them: “Students are seldom able to see at first their full meaning and importance. All arguments may be explained when these self-evident laws are granted; and it is not too much to say that the whole of Logic will be plain to those who will constantly use these laws as the key.”

Therefore we must either hold that the Cosmos is under Law and Order,  or else that it is not. And if it is not, then Chance or Arbitrary Decree rule the universe—and the Cosmos is but Chaos. There is no alternative—there can be no half-and-half about the matter. Which is it? We need scarcely to assure the student that the highest modern scientific thought agrees perfectly with the teachings of the ancient occultists, to the effect  that  the  Cosmos  is  governed  by  Law in  every  detail, and as a whole; and that there is universal order, balance, and harmony manifested through it. Not only is this so, but the ordinary human mind is able to discover the existence of Law in the universe, in its every phase of manifestation. The rising of the sun; the flow of the tides; the law of gravitation; the mechanical laws; and Natural Law in all of its phases; show the existence  of  Law  in  the  Cosmos.  Science shows us that  the  entire universe is held together by the operation of Law—that if the tiniest atom were released from the operation of Law, the entire universe would be resolved into Chaos, so interdependent are its parts, and so incompatible with Universal Law would be the slightest exception thereto. The Laws of the Universe can never be “broken”—if we come in contact with them and refuse to govern ourselves accordingly, we suffer—but the Law remains intact. We do not “break” the Law of Gravitation when we step over a precipice—we only prove its existence. If we could “break” the tiniest Law of the Cosmos, the Cosmos would be Chaos.

And these Cosmic Laws are not the result of the  arbitrary  fiat or dictum  of some Being. They are inherent in the very nature of the Cosmos. There never has been a moment in the existence of the Cosmos in which twice two did not make four; never a moment in which a straight line was not the shortest distance between two given points;  never  a  moment in which the laws of mathematics, geometry, and logic were not as true as they are today. Cosmic Laws were not made—they are inherent in the Cosmos, and inseparable from it. These Cosmic Laws arise from the  reflected power of The Law itself—they are superimposed upon the Cosmos in the very nature of the Cosmos.

The Aphorism continues: “Each and every thing, and all things, proceed in Orderly Trend.” This is a statement of the Law of Orderly Trend, one of the Seven Cosmic Laws. “Orderly” means: “In order; arranged or disposed in order; observant of order or method; not disorderly; keeping order; well regulated; free from disorder or confusion; characterized by good order; according to established order or method; according to due order or method; duly; regularly; etc.” “Trend” is a word derived from an old root meaning “a circle; a ring; round; etc.” and its present accepted meaning is: “to move around or about; to extend or lie in a particular direction; to run; to stretch; inclination in a particular direction,” or strictly: “to proceed in a particular direction.” Its use in the Arcane Teaching implies a “proceeding or moving forward,” and also (in the esoteric sense) cyclic progression. Thus the Cosmos is held to “trend” in an “orderly, regular, established” manner, according to Cosmic Laws, and under The Law. Evolution is a manifestation of Orderly Trend and  Sequence.

The Aphorism continues: “In the Cosmos there is no Chance; no Disorder; no Inharmony.” We have seen that where Law and Order govern and rule there can be no Disorder nor Inharmony. Harmony and  Balance maintain where Law and Order govern and control. We wish to  add a  few  words  regarding  the  subject of Chance, owing to the popular misconception of the nature and meaning of this much used word. “Chance” is generally held to be: “an accident; something happening without a cause; a supposed agent or mode of activity other than a force, law, or purpose.” The word was derived from the Latin word cadentia, meaning “the falling of the dice.” An “accident” is “something that happens suddenly or unexpectedly,” but the word is generally used in the sense of “something happening without due cause, and out of the established order.” The strict meaning of “Chance” is “without cause,” and it is generally so used. But with the advancing knowledge of the universal prevalence of causality, Chance in the original sense of the term is no longer regarded as existent, possible, or reasonable. The word is now employed in the scientific sense of: “The unknown, or unforeseen cause or causes of an event.”  As Benley says: “Chance is but a mere  name, and really nothing in itself; a conception of our minds, and only a compendious way of speaking, whereby we would express, that such  effects as are commonly attributed to chance, were verily produced by their true and proper causes.” The highest modern philosophical thought agrees with the Arcane Teaching that: “In the Cosmos there is no Chance.” Where Law and Order reign, there can be no Chance; no  “accidents” no “happenings,” in the sense of “without cause.” Even the cast of the dice is now seen to be as much the result of Law and Order and Sequence as is the motion of the sun, planets and tides. Casualty has been superseded by Causality in philosophical thought.

Aphorism xviii. Know ye that each and every event, and all events, proceed in Orderly and Logical Sequence. There is always a Something Before and a Something After, which men mistakenly call Cause and Effect, but which, in truth, are but relative stages of the Cosmic  Sequence.

Aphorism xviii informs us regarding the Law of Sequence, another one of Seven Cosmic Laws. It informs us that “each and every event, and all events proceed in orderly and logical sequence.” This Aphorism declares the principle of what modern philosophical thought has called the Law of Continuity, by which is meant that universal principle or law, by virtue of which there is ever maintained a relationship of precedent and subsequent—cause and effect—between all events; the idea being diametrically opposed to that which holds that events are independent and not related to other events. In the Aphorism the word “orderly” is used in the sense defined a little further back. The word “logical” is used in its general sense of “agreeing with the natural reason”; and therefore, is employed in the Aphorism, in the sense of “in a manner which accepted by the human reason as natural, orderly, according to law, and reasonable—and which therefore might be reasonably expected were the preceding events known.” The word “Sequence” is used in the sense of: “A succession, or following after, in orderly arrangement and uniformity; a series of things following in a certain order of succession.” The word itself springs from the Latin word, sequens, meaning “to follow,” and the idea of  following in regular order or procession constitutes the essential meaning of the term.

The Law of Sequence causes all things to proceed in a continuous stream or procession of events. “Continuous” means “unbroken; uninterrupted; connected; with no intervening space.” An “Event” is a “happening; something that occurs; the consequent or result of any action.” Therefore the Law of Sequence causes all happenings, occurrences, or events to follow, proceed, and evolve from previous events, happenings or occurrences; and likewise to result in subsequent events, happenings or occurrences, which flow, proceed, and evolve from them. There is always a “something before” and a “something after” every event, happening, or occurrence. Every event  has  reasons, and is in itself one of the reasons for that which must follow after. Just as no link in a continuous chain can escape having a preceding and succeeding link, so no event can fail to have precedent and subsequent events connected with and related to it. No event can be isolated from  the Cosmic Chain of Sequence, or the Cosmic Stream of Events. No event, and no thing, can stand alone in the Cosmos. Every thing and every event is interdependent, from the very nature of the Cosmos itself. Thus we see that there can be no such thing as “Chance” or “accidents” in the Cosmos. Nothing ever “merely happens,” in the usual sense of the phrase. Everything, every event, every happening, has its preceding causes, and from it will emerge the succeeding effects—all being links in the continuous chain of Sequence.

We recognize these things, dimly, in everyday life, and call them the workings of Cause and Effect. But the Aphorism makes a distinction  here  and  informs  us  that  that  which  men mistakenly call  Cause and Effect, “in truth, are but relative stages of the Cosmic Sequence. Let us proceed to a consideration of this  truth.

The statement of this Aphorism apparently conflicts with the accepted  philosophical and scientific conception of the Law of Causation, but the difference is largely a matter of expression, and the Arcane Teaching is in full harmony with the advanced conceptions of Causation, as  interpreted by the highest authorities. The Law of Causation, as advanced by modern scientific thought, may be stated generally as the conception that every thing is an effect of precedent Causes and, at the same time, the Cause of the effects which arise from it—thus each thing is a link in an endless chain of Cause and Effect. Another way of stating this conception is that every event in time, or thing in space, has Causes; and at the same time is the Cause of succeeding effects in the shape of events in time, or things in space.  This  conception  of  the  Beginningless  and Endless Chain of Cause and Effect is seen to be very similar to the Chain of Sequence of the Arcane Teaching.  But  here  is  the  difference.  The Arcane Teaching does not hold that the Chain of Sequence is Beginningless and Endless. On  the  contrary,  it  holds  that  the Cosmos emerged from the Infinity of Nothingness at the Dawn of the Cosmic Day—therefore, this particular Cosmos had an actual beginning in time; and likewise, it will have an ending in time, when it again is resolved into the Infinity of Nothingness. The Law is held to be the only Eternal, using the term in its absolute sense.

The Cosmic Activities proceed according to Law, Order and Sequence.  What you are today—what  happens this moment— is the logical result of all that has gone before in the Chain of Sequence. What is, is not because of Chance—but in accordance with Law, Order and  Sequence.  What will be tomorrow—a  year hence—a  million  years  hence—will  be  the logical result of all the things and events that are manifesting this moment. There is no break in the Chain. Everything, and every event,  proceeds from what has gone before. And from every thing, and every event, develop the seeds of future events and things. Every thing, and every event, is a blossom—and contains within itself the seeds of future blossoms. Every event is but a stage in the Whole Event of the Cosmos. Every thing is but a part of the Whole Thing of the Cosmos. The Cosmos is the Whole Thing, striving, moving, thinking, and doing, in myriads of forms and shapes and manifestations—acting in the countless series of events which together constitute the Whole Event.

At any particular moment in the Cosmic Day—at this very moment that you read these lines—certain things are at certain places, under certain conditions, acting in a certain manner— certain events are occurring under certain conditions. All this is the result of Cosmic Causes operating since the first glimmer of the Cosmic Dawn. And, likewise, at any imagined moment of the future—a year hence—a century hence—a million years hence—at any given moment there will be certain things in certain places, under certain conditions, acting in a certain manner—certain events will be occurring under certain conditions. And this too will  be the result of the Cosmic Causes, operating from the beginning—operating and in existence in some stage of Sequence, today—this moment. All that is proceeds from all that has gone before. And from all that is will flow, proceed and evolve all that shall be even unto the very ending. And these things and events are “certain,” not because of Fate, Destiny or Arbitrary Decree, but because of the operation of fixed and certain natural laws, constant, invariable and immutable. There is no Fate, no Chance, no Accidents. Cause produces  Effect.  Everything  has  its precedent, and will have its subsequent. The seeds of the future exist in the present. The seeds of the present existed in the past. No thing or event is arbitrary, separate, disconnected, independent. We are all parts of a Cosmic Whole, taking part in one Cosmic Event. Can you imagine a single thing or event without precedent causes? Can you imagine a Cosmic Law being broken? The parts are conditioned by the Whole. This is not Fate, but Law, Order, and Sequence.

 

 

 

 

 

Lesson XII.

Dominant Desire; Sovereign Will.

Aphorism xvii informs us that “The Three Principles— Substance,  Motion and Consciousness—are equally under Law.” The leading scientific minds of the day hold that the Reign of Law is operative not only over matter and motion,  but  also  over  mind.  There  are  but  few  psychologists who hold otherwise, although a few are reluctant to admit that  the  operations  of  human  volition  are  caused,  and  such therefore hold on to the old dogma of “causelessness” although candidly admitting that the only other alternative is the theory of Chance. This reluctance may be explained by the influence of  the  old  theology  which  held  that  the  admission  of  cause  in volition would annul the doctrine of “free will” (in the sense of free choice), and would destroy man’s moral responsibility. The theologians, however, do not accept the alternative  of Chance, but murmur something about “special provisions of Providence,” without explaining what they mean by this. But all denials of the operation of universal law on the mental plane are in direct defiance of the modern scientific knowledge of the laws of psychology, and the common experience of the race which informs us that people act and choose because of motives and reasons. And all human education is based upon this understanding and principle.

The trouble with the theologians is that they confuse Law, Order, and Sequence, with the old fetish of Fate, Destiny, and Predestination. They recognize the logical absurdity of holding one morally responsible for doing what for all eternity it has been predestined, predetermined, or fated one should do. When Determination is divorced from Pre-determination, a new light is seen. Notwithstanding the theological reluctance, its advocates  nevertheless  act  as if psychological laws were true, in advocating the “training” of the mind, and in offering the “motives” of rewards and punishments for actions. If the volition is free, how could these “motives” influence or affect it. All education and training of the mind implies the existence of mental laws of choice and action. The “Law of Association” is but the Law of Sequence. Without Law in the mental realm, there is but the alternative of Chance—theology to the contrary, notwithstanding.

Aphorism xix. Man on the personal plane always acts and chooses strictly in accordance with the nature of his personal character. His personal character is determined by the nature of his psychical  organism  resulting from heredity, environment, and experience, and consists of a collection of mental states the motive principle in which is Desire (including Fear, which is but a form of Desire). The personal man, like the lower forms of life, always acts and chooses: according to the sum or average of his desires and fears, the strongest motives always dominating and determining the choice and action.

Each man has a personal character—just as each actor in a play assumes a “character.” Each character, as the Aphorism states, is “a collection of mental states.” These mental states are manifest as traits, tendencies, temperament, nature, disposition, personality—what we know as “the nature of the person,” in fact. Different persons are attracted by different things, in different degrees, and respond in different ways and in different degrees. No two persons are exactly alike. Each person has his own nature, disposition and character. The dictionaries say that Character is: “The personal  qualities  or  attributes  of  a person.” Each character has its personal collection of feelings, desires, wants, inclinations, likes and dislikes, habits of thought, capacity for thought, degree and character of will, etc. Each has its subconscious collection of stored up impressions, memories, inherited traits, etc., as well as its conscious mental faculties—in fact, nine-tenths of the mental activities arise from this subconscious region. Each character has its collection of seed-thoughts which constitute its share of the race experience—the experiences of its ancestors. And each has its store of impressions and experiences which have modified it accordingly. The result of heredity, environment and experience creates a personality and character according to which one acts and chooses. This character, at any particular moment, is just what a man is at that particular moment. And as he is, so will he act and choose. He always acts and chooses by  reason of what he is. On  the  personal  plane,  he  cannot  act  differently. And what he  is—his character at the moment—always has as its motive power the sum or average of his desires and fears.

This is the point at which we must consider the objections of the “free will” theologians who will not admit that man acts and chooses according to the sum and average of his desires and fears. These people put forward the three leading “proofs” that man does not so act and choose. Let us consider them, briefly, in detail. They are as follows:

I. That one may refuse to act on a desire or fear, however strong. He may oppose his will to the desire or fear and defeat its power. This statement is unquestionably true, but the explanation is that in so willing  not to act upon the desire, he is really acting upon other and stronger  desires or fears which urge him not to do the thing in question. Each desire is a motive—and the strongest motive dominates and decides. Before he may will not to act, he must first desire or “want to” refrain from the act, or else fear to act. In short he must want not to more than he wants to. Instead of disproving the action of Desire, it affords a very good proof. He chooses to do that which he “wants to” most  strongly.

II. That one may choose to act upon a higher desire rather than upon a lower one—to act from a higher motive than from a lower one. This also is unquestionably true—but what is the “higher desire” and the “higher motive” but another form of Desire. If the “higher” is stronger, it conquers—if the “lower” is stronger, it  conquers. Whichever is felt by the man to be the most desirable according to his reason, experience and feelings is the strongest motive. Sometimes the scales are very evenly balanced, and it requires but a mental speck of dust to tip it one way or the other. But this does not disprove the rule—it only emphasizes it.

III. That one has the evidence of his consciousness that he is free to act  as he pleases—or to choose  between two or more different courses of  action. One feels most strongly that he has the freedom of choice and action. This is the “proof” considered unanswerable by the theologians. It is undoubtedly true, so far as it goes, but a moment’s consideration will show one that it adds but another proof to the truth of the power of Desire, and the Law of Cause and Effect. Waiving entirely the obvious rejoinder that the feeling or consciousness of freedom has no causal relation to the act, we see that the man merely feels and is conscious of the fact that he may act and choose as he pleases. Certainly he may, no one disputes that—but why does he “please”? Why does he want to do one thing in preference to another? And why does he finally choose to do one thing instead of the other? Is it merely Chance? Is there no reason or cause? Is it not true that he finds it  more desirable, or more satisfactory, to do the one thing? Does he not weigh the motives, reasons, feelings, and desires, by the light of his own reason, experience, nature and character, and then decide in favor of the most desirable course? His  will is free, of course— but his desires, feelings, “please to,” and  “choose  to” depend upon elements of his character—and the strongest motive, conscious or subconscious, wins the day. Between two things or objects, one chooses that which appeals to him as the “most desirable”—that which he “wants” most, or fears least.

Many will object that if this be true, it is unjust to punish one for doing what he must do according to his character. This objection arises from the old conception of Fate and Predestination, which held that a man  must do a certain thing, in spite of all that might tend to prevent. This of  course would  make  all  “punishment”  a  rank  injustice,  and  an  absurd proceeding. But the doctrine of Cause and Effect does not so hold. On the contrary it holds that one’s character may be, and  is,  changed,  modified and altered by the restraints placed upon certain actions.  These afford new motives for action or non-action. The theory of  human  Law, at least, is not that one shall be “punished” for wrongdoing in the spirit of wrath or vengeance, but that the “punishment” shall act as a  deterrent, warning, and restraining motive to prevent the recurrence of the act on the part of the criminal, and to prevent others from making the same mistake. It is society’s method of protecting itself—not a system of revenge. The very fact that the penalties of the law serve to deter some from wrongdoing is but a proof that the strongest motive dominates. The birch prevents the schoolboy from misbehaving, though he so desires very much. He fears to incur punishment, more than he desires to misbehave. We may blame people for acting wrongly, because we regret that their characters were not better developed, or that their judgment was not more perfect. We often make the mistake of blaming effects, instead of causes. Would it be just to “blame” or “punish” if our acts resulted from Chance? In the same way, remorse  and regret mean that we realize that what we did or chose was not wise or desirable, as seen in the light of subsequent events—we regret that the higher, nobler, or wiser motives were not dominant; or feel sorrow at the results of our actions. These latter feelings are often cited by those who deny Cause and Effect on the mental plane. But what, indeed, would be the reason for regret and remorse if our actions had been decided by Chance instead of by causes? If we remove Causes, we are in the hands of Chance—would that be a desirable exchange? If we deny Law, we must attribute all actions to Chance!

Summing up the fact of Dominant Desire, it may be said that people act in accordance with the line of the Greatest Satisfaction. This Greatest Satisfaction depends entirely upon the nature of the person—his character—which is regulated by his tendencies, disposition, inherited qualities, results of his experience, environment, education, training, history, etc., all of which, of course, have other causes behind them. Whatever gives to the person the Greatest Satisfaction evident at the moment of action or choice, that will he do or choose. This is the rule—test it most rigidly by applying it to your own acts and decisions, and those of others. But in so testing, do not overlook  the effect  of  Habit  as crystallized Desire; nor the effect of Fear as negative Desire. When two desires  are otherwise equal, the one most habitual will win the day. The element of Fear, or Aversion, is but a Desire “not to,” or “to avoid, or get away from.” Compulsion by others may result in action through Fear. And one often refrains from manifesting a desire because he fears to “pay the price.”

Did you ever make a choice, or perform an act which gave you the Least Satisfaction, or which you knew to be the most undesirable under all the circumstances of the case? If you did so—Why did you do it? If  you  yield  to the suggestions, desires, reason or will of another person, against your own inclination and judgment—what is this but the “line of the least resistance,” which gave you the least trouble or dissatisfaction at the moment, and in which the negative Desire of Fear had its effect?

In the case of hypnotic influence, or the domination of one’s will by another by any means, the rule is not broken, for the stronger person’s will influences and arouses the Desire of the weaker person. Even in this case, desire or fear is the motive of action or choice.

In considering this subject, remember that the Aphorism says “the sum and average of his desires—the  strongest motives always dominating and deciding the choice and action.” We often are forced to “strike an average” between our conflicting desires. And then again, wisdom, experience and intelligence enable us to discriminate between the  desirability of objects and acts, and thus play an important part in the choice. And imagination gives us a wider range of choice, by presenting a greater number of objects before us for choice. But wisdom, experience, intelligence and imagination result from Causes.

A Dominant Desire always has for its motive the attainment of something which will bring the Greatest Satisfaction, immediate or remote, or the prevention of something which will bring dissatisfaction, immediate or remote—either to the person himself, or to others in whom he is interested.  Aversion, fear, or the tendency away from persons or things, are merely the negative phases of Desire, and come under the same rule. The “most desirable” thing, according to the judgment of the moment, is always chosen—the “most undesirable” thing of the moment is always avoided. Sometimes this necessitates “striking an average.” So in the end we do that which we “like to”—we do what we “want to” do most. The “want to” and “like to” arise from Cause, and are under the Law of Sequence—links in the Cosmic Chain of Eventuality. And so, the nature of one’s character determines his acts. This explains many  actions in a strange way. For instance, one man is kind because it gives his nature the greatest satisfaction; just as another gains the greatest satisfaction by being otherwise. One finds satisfaction in doing his “duty”; while another finds satisfaction in escaping it. One finds satisfaction in virtue; another in vice. One finds it in selfishness; another in doing for and giving to others. One finds more satisfaction in giving his life for his country; another finds it in running away and hiding. One finds the greatest satisfaction in giving; another, in getting. One finds the greatest satisfaction in being moral; another in the reverse. One takes the greatest pleasure in being a good citizen; another finds his satisfaction in the opposite. Each acts according to his nature and character—just as a cat and dog acts  according  to  its  nature.  But  man  can  change  his  nature,  if he so desires. And he often so desires, while the lower animal does not—that is the main point of difference.

We have laid much stress upon this subject of Dominant Desire, because we wish to awaken you to a realization, perhaps for the first time, of what an important part Desire plays in the choice and actions of the man on the personal plane of life— how much in thrall to it is the race. When one realizes his bonds, he is in a position to work to rid himself of them. It is only when the slave realizes that he is a slave, that thoughts of freedom come to him. There is a plane above that of Personality—a plane in which Positive Will takes the place of Desire. Sovereign Will is above Dominant Desire. Listen to the Aphorism:

Aphorism xx. When man attains Individuality—Egohood— he enters upon the plane of Will, and rises above the plane of Desire. Desire and Will are the opposite poles of the same Principle—the Centre of Balance being Reason. On the plane of Will, though one still remains under Law, yet he may learn to use Law instead of remaining passive to it. He may learn to oppose Law to laws. He may learn to create Desire by Will, as well as to restrain and  master Desire by  Will. Furthermore—and this the greatest of all—he may learn to Will to Will. He may learn to complete the Circle of Will. He may learn the Secret of the Excluded  Middle. When  this last Secret is learned, man is well on the road to Mastery.

By rising to the plane of Will, over and above the plane of Desire, we rise above the lower laws, and acknowledge supremacy only to the higher  laws. We may then oppose Law to laws, and  counteract  and  use  them.  Desire and Will are but the opposing poles of the same principle—Reason being the Centre of Balance, as the Aphorism states. The majority of the  race  remain  centred  in  the  negative  pole—few reach  the centre—and still fewer learn the secret of swinging the centre over to the positive side. He on the negative plane can do no more than to Desire to Will. He of the positive plane may learn to Will to Will. He who has learned the secret may transmute his desires, and transform his  inclinations,  tendencies, and tastes. Such a one is the Master of Desire, instead of its slave. The art of Willing to Will is one of the great feats of occultism— one of the great attainments of the Arcane Teachings. In it lies also the secret of Will Power in its outward manifestations, for he  who  can  change,  and  create  desires  in  himself,  can  produce similar results in the desire-mind of others. In attaining the plane of Positive Will, one enters into the field of all Occult Power and Attainment—the rest is all a matter of progress, practice, exercise and mastery. When one grasps the Secret of Will, he has laid hands upon the Sword of Power.

Running back from cause to prior cause, and to still more remote precedent causes of his desires, the Individual finds himself at last  confronting  the  Cosmic  Will.  Retracing  his  path back to the present, he finds himself confronting his Personal Will, which is moved by Desire. In other words, he finds a Chain of Desire extending from the Cosmic Will to the Personal Will—a chain of countless links, but having a beginning in Will, and an ending in Will—an Endless Chain, because it  is a Circle. Thereupon he learns the first lessons of the Arcane Secret of the Excluded Middle, and thenceforth strives to realize the union of the two ends of Will. From the realization of this Union arises the Individual Will—the Positive Will of the Ego. In this process the law of Cause and Effect is not violated, but Will is made the Cause of Will—the  Cause  and  Effect merge. When this is attained—then does Man indeed become the Master!