• Ethical conduct (Sila)

4) Right action (samma kammamta)
The Buddhist idea of Right action is "Abstaining from taking life, abstaining from stealing, abstaining from unchastity: This, monks, is called right action."

One source says: "Together with the idea of ahimsā [harmlessness] and right speech, right action constitutes the Five Precepts, which form the fundamental ethical code undertaken by lay followers of Buddhism, and which are as follows:

1. To refrain from destroying living beings.
2. To refrain from stealing.
3. To refrain from sexual misconduct (adultery, rape, etc.).
4. To refrain from false speech (lying).
5. To refrain from intoxicants which lead to heedlessness.

Each of these ideas will be dealt with individually.

Harmlessness (ahimsa)
AL I:42. So with thy all; thou hast no right but to do thy will.
AL I:43. Do that, and no other shall say nay.
AL I:44. For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect.
AL III:60. There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.

Although it is written that "Love is the law, love under will" (AL I:57) and that we are to "Love one another with burning hearts" (AL II:24), but the deciding factor is the Will. If it is truly one's Will to harm another living being, then "no other shall say nay" (AL I:43).

This isn't to mean that harming someone is always "OK," because many of the times one has the option to inflict harm, it would better facilitate the Will not to do such. If one sees a police officer and decides to inflict harm on him, one will be incarcerated and one's Will will surely be unnecessarily restricted.

Right speech
To understand Right speech, see this earlier article dealing with this subject.

Destroying living beings
The idea here is the same as in the previous section dedicated to harmlessness or ahimsa. In Thelema, it is understood that if it is truly one's Will to destroy another living being, then "no other shall say nay" (AL I:43).

Stealing
AL I:22. Since I am Infinite Space, and the Infinite Stars thereof, do ye also thus. Bind nothing! Let there be no difference made among you between any one thing & any other thing; for thereby there cometh hurt.
AL I:41. The word of Sin is Restriction.
AL I:52. If this be not aright; if ye confound the space-marks, saying: They are one; or saying, They are many; if the ritual be not ever unto me: then expect the direful judgments of Ra Hoor Khuit!
AL III:60. There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.

Ram Dass, in his book Paths to God, has some interesting insight on the topic of stealing. He writes, "If everybody's 'us,' who are you going to steal from? Are you going to rip yourself off? Are you going to steal out of the cookie jar at home? You're just taking it from yourself. When there's no 'them' in your universe, you can't steal - it's that simple. So in order to steal, you have to see your victim as 'other.' That means stealing takes us deeper into the illusion of me/you, which is the illusion of identity, which is the illusion of separation. That, from a spiritual point of view, is why non-stealing is part of the practice of ashtanga yoga; it's not because of our usual ideas about morality, it's beacause in order to steal we have to turn the other person into 'them,' which rules out our seeing them as 'us.' That takes us away from the One."

This insight shows that from the point-of-view of an unfragmented consciousness, stealing is an illusion because there is no difference (AL I:22). It should be understood, I think, that from the most illuminated standpoint, there is no 'other' and therefore nothing or no one to steal from because this would imply duality. Crowley states in his commentary to AL I:41, "Interference with the will of another is the great sin, for it predicates the existence of another. In this duality sorrow consists." Except, this does not mean that one can do what is considered 'stealing' without any consequence. If a man in Samadhi were to take an apple from a stand, he would not think it to be 'stealing' as he recognizes his body, the apple, the stand, and all else to be part of a unity (therefore there is no stealer and stolen), but this does not mean that the shopkeeper will not see this action as stealing and enforce the normal cultural punishments. Though one may abide in the consciousness where all is one and therefore stealing is a sort of illusion, the earthly vehicle of this Being will still suffer the consequences if it steals. Being incarcerated for stealing is surely more of a hindrance to the Going of the Will than if one refrained.

Essentially, stealing is not "good" in that it reinforces the sorrow of duality. Ram Dass further explains in his book that non-stealing is not good in itself but only as a means to not identifying with the dualistic consciousness of "self" and "other." Stealing enforces these dualistic and illusory notions of existence and therefore should be avoided. Essentially, in Thelema one would understand that stealing is not forbidden but doing so will usually incur unnecessary restriction from those stolen from. If it truly is one's Will to steal, "no other shall say nay" (AL I:43). The final rule is the Will - "There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt" (AL III:60) - but it should be understood that in many cases, stealing will usualy cause unnecessary restriction and sorrow.

Sexual misconduct
AL I:40. Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
AL I:41. The word of Sin is Restriction. O man! refuse not thy wife, if she will! O lover, if thou wilt, depart! There is no bond that can unite the divided but love: all else is a curse. Accursed! Accursed be it to the aeons! Hell.
AL I:42. Let it be that state of manyhood bound and loathing. So with thy all; thou hast no right but to do thy will.
AL I:43. Do that, and no other shall say nay.
AL I:44. For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect.
AL I:51. Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam! Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me.
AL III:55. Let Mary inviolate be torn upon wheels: for her sake let all chaste women be utterly despised among you!

Adultery is not condemned by Thelema. Liber AL states clearly to "take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will! But always unto me" (AL I:51). These loves may easily fall outside the ideas of what is "right" in monogamous relationships, especially in the normal Western ideas of relationships and marriage. The idea of "But always unto me" means one should dedicate every act of Love unto Nuit, which is a practice of bhakti yoga.

Rape is by definition against the Will of one of the participants in the act. Therefore, this act could be said to be "un-Thelemic."

The idea of chastity and "abstaining from un-chastity" refers less to sexual chastity than chastity of the mind and the Will. Crowley writes in his essay "Chastity" from "Little Essays Toward Truth," "Chastity may thus be defined as the strict observance of the Magical Oath; that is, in the Light of the Law of Thelema, absolute and perfected devotion to the Holy Guardian Angel and exclusive pursuit of the Way of the True Will."

I quote parts of Crowley's extensive commentary to AL III:51, "[Liber 418:] 'Moreover, there is Mary, a blasphemy against BABALON, for she hath shut herself up; and therefore is she the Queen of all those wicked devils that walk upon the earth, those that thou savest even as little black specks that stained the Heaven of Urania. And all these are the excrement of Choronzon.' It is this 'shutting up' that is hideous, the image of death. It is the opposite of Going, which is God... We of Thelema say that 'Every man and every woman is a star.' We do not fool and flatter women; we do not despise and abuse them. To us a woman is Herself, absolute, original, independent, free, self-justified, exactly as a man is. We dare not thwart Her Going, Goddess she! We arrogate no right upon Her will; we claim not to deflect Her development, to dispose of Her desires, or to determine Her destiny. She is Her own sole arbiter; we ask no more than to supply our strength to Her, whose natural weakness else were prey to the world's pressure. Nay more, it were too zealous even to guard Her in Her Going; for She were best by Her own self-reliance to win Her own way forth! We do not want Her as a slave; we want Her free and royal, whether Her love fight death in our arms by night, or Her loyalty ride by day beside us in the Charge of the Battle of Life.

"Let the woman be girt with a sword before me!"

"In her is all power given."

So sayeth this our Book of the Law. We respect Woman in the self of Her own nature; we do not arrogate the right to criticise her. We welcome her as our ally, come to our camp as her Will, free-flashing, sword-swinging, hath told Her, Welcome, thou Woman, we hail thee, star shouting to Star! Welcome to rout and to revel! Welcome to fray and to feast! Welcome to vigil and victory! Welcome to war with out {WEH NOTE: Some texts have "out" some "its"} wounds! Welcome to peace with its pageants! Welcome to lust and to laughter! Welcome to board and to bed! Welcome to trumpet and triumph; welcome to dirge and to death! It is we of Thelema who truly love and respect Woman, who hold her sinless and shameless even as we are; and those who say that we despise Her are those who shrink from the flash of our falchions as we strike from Her limbs their foul fetters."

It must be remembered that these commentaries were written in the 1920s, decades before the women's rights movements. Essentially, woman is to decide her own sexuality and when to take their "fill and will of love as they will, when, where and with whom they will (AL I:51).

False speech
False speech has been dealt with in an earlier article on Right speech.

Intoxicants
AL I:51. Be goodly therefore: dress ye all in fine apparel; eat rich foods and drink sweet wines and wines that foam!
AL I:52. If this be not aright; if ye confound the space-marks, saying: They are one; or saying, They are many; if the ritual be not ever unto me: then expect the direful judgments of Ra Hoor Khuit!
AL II:22. I am the Snake that giveth Knowledge & Delight and bright glory, and stir the hearts of men with drunkenness. To worship me take wine and strange drugs whereof I will tell my prophet, & be drunk thereof! They shall not harm ye at all. It is a lie, this folly against self. The exposure of innocence is a lie. Be strong, o man! lust, enjoy all things of sense and rapture: fear not that any God shall deny thee for this.
Liber LXV I:64. Intoxicate the inmost, O my lover, not the outermost!

Drugs and intoxication are not inherently "evil" or "bad" in Thelema. In fact, we are told to "drink sweet wines and wines that foam" in AL I:51 and we are told that "To worship me take win and strange drugs whereof I will tell my prophet, & be drunk thereof!" The use of drinks and other "drugs" can be used to invoked Hadit, but AL I:52 tells us that the ritual must be dedicated ever unto Nuit - one must always keep the highest ideal in mind.

Intoxication is a common theme in religious literature like Sufi poems and bhakti yoga in that it is a reflection of divine intoxication. This idea is reflected in the line from Liber LXV which says, "Intoxicate the inmost, O my lover, not the outermost!" Crowley comments on AL I:51, "True Religion is intoxication, in a sense. We are told elsewhere to intoxicate the innermost, not the outermost; but I think that the word 'wine' should be taken in its widest sense as meaning that which brings out the soul. Climate, soil, and race change conditions; each man or woman must find and choose the fit intoxicant. Thus hashish in one or the other of its forms seems to suit the Moslem, to go with dry heat; opium is right for the Mongol; whiskey for the dour temperament and damp cold climate of the Scot."

Summary
*If it is truly one's Will to harm another living being, then "no other shall say nay" (AL I:43).
*See this article about Right speech
*If it is truly one's Will to destroy another living being, then "no other shall say nay" (AL I:43).
*stealing is not "good" in that it reinforces the sorrow of duality but Will is the deciding factor
*sexual freedom is paramount to Thelema for both men and women, but one should never force another into sexual contact against their will (rape, etc.). Aside from this, there are no restrictions against adultery or sexual unchastity.
*intoxicants are allowed to be used in Thelema if they are dedicated unto Nuit and dedicated towards discovery of the True Will. Intoxication is a common theme in rerligious literature that is a reflection of divine intoxication (usually through devotion)