We explore the idea of will (spoiler: it is not a “thing”), and consider the fictions of freedom and of not freedom concerning the will. We consider the nefarious intentions behind the priestly “invention” of the idea of free will: to justify punishment. We collapse the sentence structure to verb only, and jettison the subject as a popular prejudice and a grammatical fiction. The doer and the deed are one and the same. We consider how the idea of free will allows the little lambs to aggrandize themselves as “good” rather than reckoning with the reality of their weakness. We see that lambs, in fact, can only be lambs and birds of prey can only be birds of prey. The will is not free or not free, but rather strong or weak. The will is not separate from the nature of the one who wills. A weak nature = a weak will. A strong nature = a strong will. We briefly consider the pre-historical origins of the weak will of the herd animal and the strong will of the lone predator and the strength and hostility prerequisite to a sharp and clear vision of that which is. All told, we don’t figure anything out definitively about whether he loves me or loves me not, but we do gain a means of orienting ourselves more precisely to our own nature—whatever it is—and our attitude toward ourselves and Life.