What's your take on Revelation?
-
Just curious as to how other Thelemites interpret The Book Of Revelation.
Initially I thought it was a description of an individual's "initiatory" process or as some academics seem to think it was a symbolic representation of political events at the time. It seems however that John of Patmos (if that's who wrote it) could well have had a vision of future "Aeonic" changes especially given a Thelemic interpretation.
However the author seems to have envisioned that the current Aeon will be followed again with an Osirian-type Aeon, by mention of the fact that "Christ will return". This seems to conflict with the idea of the Aeon of Maat. Or does it? I have to admit the symbolsim and processes described are a bit beyond my skill at interpreting at this point.
Any thoughts?
-
Any political implications, or worldly-event circumstances, are the consequence of deep, unexpressed individual and mass-mind psychological factors working themselves out as projections.
Fundamentally, the book is a technical manual on yoga. It is a fairly rigorous curriculum of the chakras (four or five individual passes, going from memory) and the consequences of applying yogic methods to their systematic purification and awakening. All of the major content of besides the multiple seven-fold passes pretty much falls into the category of phenomena or consequences of that work.
I've had a book about one third written on paper, and almost finished in my head, for a dozen years. Several years ago, I gave a preliminary start-to-finish tour of it to our members at one of our annual all-Order seminars. There are a few technical rough spots but, for the most part, it's pretty straight forward.
Example: The seven letters to the Churches of Assiah are the purification pass of the chakras. Each is addressed in turn, something is said basic to establish its nature and characteristics, usually some praise of its virtue is mentioned, and then there is a symbolic statement of an existing error or something that needs to be done to bring it into preliminary purification. As a consequence of this, Ch. 4 then opens with a vision that is representative of typical consequences of that work.
I don't know that the vision anticipated Aeonic changes. Rather, it talked about things that we only started to understand in a different way thousands of years later.
No, I don't think it shows a reversion to Christianity etc. "Christ will return" is simply a measure of the fruit of the work. In this sense, "Christ" is the same as "Horus." This Greek work is careful to use the full "Jesus Christ" which, in the Greek original, has numerical ratios identical with those of the lines and line-parts that compose the pentagram (basic Golden Mean stuff) - this is "the Anointed One" in the broadest sense, the Holy Guardian Angel.
-
A: Jim, I really hope you'll finish that book. A scholarly treatment of that book from this perspective is needed.
B: Modern, until a better book comes out, this is one person's analysis of it that might be fruitful. I feel like this guy understood a lot about the gematria and demonstrated it successfully, but regarding the overall structure and process of the story of Revelation, I didn't get the feeling he fully understood it. Not that I do either, but I am now convinced that the author of Rev. was consciously using gematria to communicate concepts.
Apocalypse Unsealed by James Morgan Pryse
Peace.
-
@modernPrimitive said
"However the author seems to have envisioned that the current Aeon will be followed again with an Osirian-type Aeon, by mention of the fact that "Christ will return". This seems to conflict with the idea of the Aeon of Maat. Or does it?"
Not to go too far afield of Revelations, but I've always been a bit confused by the line in the Book of the Law, III:34, that says "another sacrifice shall stain the tomb." Might this imply a return to a more Osirian theology of self-sacrifice in the Aeon to follow this one?
In Crowley's new comment, he seemed to interpret it through the lens of sex magick... but he also interpreted this rhymed section of III:34 as generally referring to the present-day "revolution" that begins the Aeon of Horus. However, I wonder if it's more straightforward to interpret this part as referring to the next Aeon. (I think, for example, that Hrumachis "rising" from the throne is symbolic of Horus vacating the Hierophant's throne in the East to make way for the next Hierophant.)
I recently purchased a book on Revelations that looks at it through a Catholic lens. ("Coming Soon" by Michael Barber.) Although I disagree with nearly all of the literal conclusions, it's fascinating to read it through a symbolic filter that relates much of it to the Catholic liturgy, and not to simplistic predictions of "end-times" events.
Steve
-
@Steven Cranmer said
"Not to go too far afield of Revelations, but I've always been a bit confused by the line in the Book of the Law, III:34, that says "another sacrifice shall stain the tomb." Might this imply a return to a more Osirian theology of self-sacrifice in the Aeon to follow this one?"
Sacrifice isn't dead and gone in Thelema - simply the error of old ideas of self-sacrifice.
At root (that is, etymologically), "sacrifice" means "to make sacred." (I know you know this, Steve. I'm playing to the box seats.) In practice, it continues to have valuable meaning in a sense not too different from "renunciation" - the relinquishment of something previously held to be of value, in the recognition that it pales before something more real and important. Liber Legis also doesn't back away from the sense of "an offering in homage." And the whole "spilling of one's blood to the cup of Babalon" is out-and-out sacrifice, whether taken in the sexual or psycho-spiritual sense.
But the verse you cite does use language that seems to speak of the spilling of blood (which, of course {head spinning this early in the morning}, has many meanings) as a prerequisite for humanity's next quantum leap forward. Presumably, as a species, we won't have outgrown the reflex to initially resist the new wave, and thus act out the dramatic shift in a "lowest common denomionator" way?
"However, I wonder if it's more straightforward to interpret this part as referring to the next Aeon."
I've always taken it that way. (And thought AC did, too - I don't have the commentaries here at work to double-check.)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Example: The seven letters to the Churches of Assiah are the purification pass of the chakras. Each is addressed in turn ..."
In order? The first letter is about the Muladhara, the second about Svadhisthana, etc.?
-
@gmugmble said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"Example: The seven letters to the Churches of Assiah are the purification pass of the chakras. Each is addressed in turn ..."In order? The first letter is about the Muladhara, the second about Svadhisthana, etc.?"
Going from memory, yes (in that particular instance).
-
Wow...very interesting. Thanks for the input.
You know if the author had used imagery like gates or something I might have figured they related to the chakras, but scrolls and churches? I wonder why the strange symbolism rather than a more "direct" treaties - was it to hide this from the uninitiated or was it simply appropriate symbolism for the time? (I suppose much is lost in translation too)
Jim, you really need to finish that book!
PS: Does anyone think that "Yehashua Ben Yosef " (Jesus the "man") was an actual manifestation of the Osirian Logos (like Crowley claimed to be the Logos of the Aeon) or was it simply mythology conflated with history? It would resolve alot of those weird Biblical verses like "No one comes to the father except through me"....though I suppose the actual historical facts are difficult to determine given the dates of writing and the influence of gnosticism or the early church on those texts etc etc.
-
@modernPrimitive said
"You know if the author had used imagery like gates or something I might have figured they related to the chakras, but scrolls and churches?"
A "church" is literally a "gathering place for the Lord" (kurion) - not a bad reference to a sacred energy center. (In fact, "sacred energy center" isn't a bad name for what some people call churches!) - And it isn't the scroll, it's the seals on the scroll.
The 7 churches are not of Asia but of Assiah - they are first accessed through their manifestation in the field of the senses. And the seals are on a parchment, i.e., a skin, and open up its back. (Rev. 5:1: "And I saw... a scroll written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals." The chakras are within and on the backside.)
-
93,
With more enthusiasm than understanding, some years ago I tried to follow through on JAE's idea on my blog skepticaltheurgist.blogharbor.com/blog/_archives/2005/7/28/1084515.html.
I don't wholly stand by this writing four years later, but some of it might be thought-provoking, if only in the sense of providing something with which to disagree. If you type "John" in the Search bar, the posts come up.
I ended up abandoning the analysis, feeling I lacked the insight to pull it all together, but I did go through several chapters.
93 93/93,
EM
-
The recurring symbolism of seven in Revelations > the symbolism of seven in Babalon > Gurdjieff's seven levels of man > the seven ages of man > the seven planets > the seven chakras = mankind raised to full stature
-
I have always taken Revelation and the 'Second Coming' to be an imperfect premonition of the arrival of the New Æon. Similarly, this can correspond to the Hebraic notion of Olam Haba and the coming of the Messiah = Christ = Horus. That these visions would be at least partially flawed is expected, as one Æon cannot hope to fully comprehend the next. But the ideas of the 'the Beast whose number is 666', 'the Whore of Babylon' and of the world's consumption by fire all seem to point to the coming of the Child in 1904; and especially the third chapter of Liber Legis.
@Jim Eshelman said
"I don't know that the vision anticipated Aeonic changes. Rather, it talked about things that we only started to understand in a different way thousands of years later."
Jim - I will read Revelation completely following your interpretation, but if you consider the words of St. John to be indicative of a spiritual system present in his time rather than in one to come (as you seem to be), how do you interpret the Beast 666 and the Whore of Babylon? As the same archetypes that he invokes even in that antiquity, or something else?
-
@PatchworkSerpen said
"Jim - I will read Revelation completely following your interpretation, but if you consider the words of St. John to be indicative of a spiritual system present in his time rather than in one to come (as you seem to be), how do you interpret the Beast 666 and the Whore of Babylon? As the same archetypes that he invokes even in that antiquity, or something else?"
I did a little research last night after Jim inspired me. (thanks Jim) and found the following supposedly based on Greek gematria:
" 999 - Epistemon, intuitively wise, the initiated, integrated Higher Self
888 - Iesous (Jesus), the Higher Mind/Ethical Triad, the upper three sephiroth in the realm of the Soul; symbolized by beast #1 the Lamb; and
777 - Stauros the cross of matter on which Divinity is crucified, symbolized by the cross on the Tree connecting the ego and Soul, whose center is Tipareth.
666 - He Phren, the lower mind, the upper two sephiroth in the Lower Triad, realm of the ego; symbolized by beast #2 called 'the Beast';
555 - Epithumia, the desire nature, Yesod, the lowest sephira in the ego realm, symbolized by beast #3 the Red Dragon;
444 - Speirema, the serpent coil or kundalini force which powers the journey up the Tree.
333 - Akrasia, the body, Malkuth, the lowest sephira on the Tree, symbolized by beast #4, the False Prophet."So accordingly 666 is the "he Phren" or "lower mind". Personally this makes quite a lot of sense assuming that it's accurate in terms of ancient Greek Gematria. Does it apply to Crowley....well I'm not sure. Perhaps from the point of view that the lower mind applies to a man, and in one sense Crowley was a "man" but then there's the whole Solar association with 666 as well whereas they assocaite Tipheret with 777 (perhaps they're counting Daat and in Crowleys system he's not?). So either there's an "mystery" in all of it or it's just two different systems of Gematria - one applicable then and one applicable now, one counting Daat and the other one not? I'm also not too clued up on the source's accuracy in terms of Greek Gematria and whether it's accurate historically. 666 does seem to be "lower and negative" in Revelation than being associated as the Logos...it's rather something that must be overcome. Did they even have a Tree in those days?
Source:
www.halexandria.org/dward907.htmEDIT:
I tried to make "He Phren" add up to 666 using Isopsephy but am not getting the results, so I'm not sure how the author of the above link deduces this. It may be again a "modern interpretation" based on Kaballah that had a different form in those times. And then, just to throw a little spanner in the works:"The early Church father Irenaeus knew several occurrences of the 616-variant but regarded them as a scribal error and affirmed that the number 666 stood "in all the most approved and ancient copies" and is attested by "those men who saw John face to face".[14]
Red arrow points to χιϛʹ (616) in P115 deciphered in May 2005.In May 2005, it was reported that scholars at Oxford University using advanced imaging techniques[15] had been able to read previously illegible portions of the earliest known record of the Book of Revelation(a 1,700 year old papyrus), from the Oxyrhynchus site, Papyrus 115 or P115, dating one century after Irenaeus. The fragment gives the Number of the Beast as 616 (chi, iota, stigma), rather than the majority text 666 (chi, xi, stigma).[1] The other early witness Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C) has it written in full: hexakosiai deka hex (lit. six hundred sixteen).[16]
Significantly, P115 aligns with Codex Alexandrinus (A) and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C) which are generally regarded as providing the best testimony to Revelation. Thus, P115 has superior testimony to that of P47 which aligns with Codex Sinaiticus and together form the second-best witness to the Book of Revelation. This has led some scholars to conclude that 616 is the original number of the beast.[17][18]
Dr. Paul Lewes in his book, A Key to Christian Origins (1932) wrote:
"The figure 616 is given in one of the two best manuscripts, C (Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Paris), by the Latin version of Tyconius (DCXVI, ed. Souter in the Journal of Theology, SE, April 1913), and by an ancient Armenian version (ed. Conybaere, 1907). Irenaeus knew about it [the 616 reading], but did not adopt it (Haer. v.30,3), Jerome adopted it (De Monogramm., ed. Dom G Morin in the Rev. Benedictine, 1903). It is probably original. The number 666 has been substituted for 616 either by analogy with 888, the [Greek] number of Jesus (Deissmann), or because it is a triangular number, the sum of the first 36 numbers (1+2+3+4+5+6...+36 = 666)".[19]Professor David C. Parker, Professor of New Testament Textual Criticism and Paleography at the University of Birmingham, thinks that 616, although less memorable than 666, is the original.[20] Dr. Ellen Aitken said: “Scholars have argued for a long time over this, and it now seems that 616 was the original number of the beast. It's probably about 100 years before any other version."[21]"
From wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Bea
-
"...as one Æon cannot hope to fully comprehend the next."
Nor the previous, in my opinion.
-
@Frater_AVV said
"
"...as one Æon cannot hope to fully comprehend the next."Nor the previous, in my opinion."
Very True. I agree. Most times the Æon cannot even fully comprehend itself let alone another.
-
@modernPrimitive said
"I did a little research last night after Jim inspired me. (thanks Jim) and found the following supposedly based on Greek gematria:
" 999 - Epistemon, intuitively wise, the initiated, integrated Higher Self
888 - Iesous (Jesus), the Higher Mind/Ethical Triad, the upper three sephiroth in the realm of the Soul; symbolized by beast #1 the Lamb; and
777 - Stauros the cross of matter on which Divinity is crucified, symbolized by the cross on the Tree connecting the ego and Soul, whose center is Tipareth.
666 - He Phren, the lower mind, the upper two sephiroth in the Lower Triad, realm of the ego; symbolized by beast #2 called 'the Beast';
555 - Epithumia, the desire nature, Yesod, the lowest sephira in the ego realm, symbolized by beast #3 the Red Dragon;
444 - Speirema, the serpent coil or kundalini force which powers the journey up the Tree.
333 - Akrasia, the body, Malkuth, the lowest sephira on the Tree, symbolized by beast #4, the False Prophet."So accordingly 666 is the "he Phren" or "lower mind". Personally this makes quite a lot of sense assuming that it's accurate in terms of ancient Greek Gematria. Does it apply to Crowley....well I'm not sure. Perhaps from the point of view that the lower mind applies to a man, and in one sense Crowley was a "man" but then there's the whole Solar association with 666 as well whereas they assocaite Tipheret with 777 (perhaps they're counting Daat and in Crowleys system he's not?). So either there's an "mystery" in all of it or it's just two different systems of Gematria - one applicable then and one applicable now, one counting Daat and the other one not? I'm also not too clued up on the source's accuracy in terms of Greek Gematria and whether it's accurate historically. 666 does seem to be "lower and negative" in Revelation than being associated as the Logos...it's rather something that must be overcome. Did they even have a Tree in those days?"
Yes, that's one of the singularly important contributions Pyrse made to the study. It's stunning. - Probably it's most significant implication, though, is that this work was constructed (or experienced - it probably really was a vision) within the context of a mystical training based on a formalized Greek model.
"I tried to make "He Phren" add up to 666 using Isopsephy but am not getting the results, so I'm not sure how the author of the above link deduces this. It may be again a "modern interpretation" based on Kaballah that had a different form in those times. "
Greek has its own gematria system, on which all of these are based. The letters Heh Phi Rho Heh Nu have the values 8 + 500 + 100 + 8 + 50 = 666.
BTW, the 616 matter is a well known and exceedingly minor scribal error - a typo! - that I think deserves no attention at all.
For the most part, the analysis of Revelations can be based on the standard translations. There are some places, though, that you miss key points unless you read the Greek original. That's what slowed me (and temporarily shelved the project a few years ago): I'm not entirely retranslating the Greek original, but I'm attentively reading the Greek all the way through and assessing where it's worth noting something. And, while I can move through ancient Greek passably well with references at hand, it's not the same for me as reading English - not something to do to kill time on the bus, let's say (since I'd have a couple of books splayed out and a stack of papers I'm hand annotating) - so it got limited to when I can set aside large blocks of time and spread a lot of stuff out. Anyway, a few small changes sometimes make a huge difference, and you reminded me of the most popular of these:
Rev. 13:18:
ODEH SOPhIA ESTIN.O EChON NOYN PsEPhISATATO TON 'ARIThMON TOY ThHRIOY. 'ARIThMOS GAR 'ANThROPOY 'ESTI. ChAIO 'ARIThMOS 666.
Hode he sophia estin. Ho echon noun psephisato ton arithmon tou theriou. Arithmos gar anthropou esti. Chai ho arithmos 666.
Usually translated (KJV): "Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is six hundred threescore and six."The Greek word therion means some variety of beast. The solution to this 666 puzzle is the phrase to mega therion, "the great beast." What is the great beast? The answer is stated outright. To understand it, though, you have to know that Greek (like many other languages) doesn't have an indefinite article. That is, "cat" and "a cat" are written exactly the same. (You add a or an in translation when it is contextually convenient.) Also (as in Latin and some other languages, but not so reliably in English), there are different words for a male human (vir, "man" = human adult male) and the human species (homo, "man" = "the human race").
The phrase usually translated "it is the number of a man" has a gratuitous article in translation; and it has been misunderstood, due to translation, that anthropos means "the human species," not "a human adult male.") The phrase therefore should be translated: "It is the number of MAN." That is: "It is the number of HUMANITY."
And this resolves the other mystery. Whereas therion means any beast - essentially any member of the animal kingdom except the human - the Great Beast is anthropos, humanity itselfl
Here is wisdom! Read Revelations with this solution in mind, and pretty much everything superficially stated about that particular beast becomes transparent.
There is more, though. As your outline above shows, out of the whole stream of multiple beasts in Revelations, this particular one is that where marking the full awakening of the heart chakra. In developmental context, it is the prophesy of humanity's collective awakening into a highly evolved Ruach (which was still rather juvenile to adolescent in the 1st Century), and the evolutionary impact of that on the world. It is humanity as the emerging Sun, differentiating itself to the point of isolation from the Nephesh layer marked the "un-great" beasts normally meant by therion.
Read; and let them that have eyes, see.
-
"That these visions would be at least partially flawed is expected, as one Æon cannot hope to fully comprehend the next."
It takes an aeon for each principle (Isis, Osiris, Horus) to birth, develop and come into being. If so, it is only when an aeon *is finished *and a new one arises that the former aeon is completed and finally makes sense. Horus will take an aeon to develop before we understand its full implications but, if so, that means Osiris should make more sense than ever now. That would mean prior to 1904, the meaning of Osiris was still a mystery and an apparent absurdity.
@Jim Eshelman said
"And this resolves the other mystery. Whereas therion means any beast - essentially any member of the animal kingdom except the human - the Great Beast is anthropos, humanity itselfl
Here is wisdom! Read Revelations with this solution in mind, and pretty much everything superficially stated about that particular beast becomes transparent.
There is more, though. As your outline above shows, out of the whole stream of multiple beasts in Revelations, this particular one is that where marking the full awakening of the heart chakra. In developmental context, it is the prophesy of humanity's collective awakening into a highly evolved Ruach (which was still rather juvenile to adolescent in the 1st Century), and the evolutionary impact of that on the world. It is humanity as the emerging Sun, differentiating itself to the point of isolation from the Nephesh layer marked the "un-great" beasts normally meant by therion.
Read; and let them that have eyes, see."
Thanks Jim for that great explanation. One of the aspects of this awakening via opening of the chakras will be individual consciousness plugged into planetary consciousness.
-
@he atlas itch said
"
"That these visions would be at least partially flawed is expected, as one Æon cannot hope to fully comprehend the next."It takes an aeon for each principle (Isis, Osiris, Horus) to birth, develop and come into being. If so, it is only when an aeon *is finished *and a new one arises that the former aeon is completed and finally makes sense. Horus will take an aeon to develop before we understand its full implications but, if so, that means Osiris should make more sense than ever now. That would mean prior to 1904, the meaning of Osiris was still a mystery and an apparent absurdity.
"I accept this perspective also, but what you have is actually hindsight, or a general overview, not real empathy. The old Aeon is simply a concept which pertains to our present state of mind, The Linear Past is not "Real" in an independent objective sense, and hence cannot be experienced{ since at whatever point it is experienced, it then becomes present tense} There is only "Now" from a classical perspective, whereby the present may be understood as the cumulative effects of the past, hence the more remote, the less felt(impact) as a real experience. On another note, everyone but those in the most extreme denial could deny that this present age is being defined by the new level of processing power and realities afforded by computers, case in point...This Forum.
-
Thanks Jim.
Some brilliant insights there. It's strange because I was "intuiting" a similar idea, that being that 666 is the number of a man (any man) as opposed to say an angel or a god. The original Greek solves it completely. What I don't understand are the other Kabalistic associations such as 888 for Christ etc as I would put Christ at Tipheret as well. Anyway, that's for future study....I guess I should be focusing on other studies with more fervour! I suppose I am squeezing the remnants of a Christian upbringing out of my system!
93 93/93
-
@modernPrimitive said
"Thanks Jim.
Some brilliant insights there. It's strange because I was "intuiting" a similar idea, that being that 666 is the number of a man (any man) as opposed to say an angel or a god. The original Greek solves it completely. What I don't understand are the other Kabalistic associations such as 888 for Christ etc as I would put Christ at Tipheret as well. Anyway, that's for future study....I guess I should be focusing on other studies with more fervour! I suppose I am squeezing the remnants of a Christian upbringing out of my system!
93 93/93"
6x3=18=9
8x3=24=6