Your HGA's name
-
A couple of examples from my own life that might give some insight (or at least a chuckle!).
(1)
When I was a Probationer, I customarily did Tarot readings with a preliminary invocation over the deck that would include a phrase referring to "my Holy Guardian Angel, whatever be Thy Name." One day, on inwardly reciting this, a voice clear as can be instantly responded: "Abaddon." - Well (I thought naively and ignorantly), this is something! I wrote it up in the diary, and I sent a letter about it off to Soror Meral, who soon responded with three or four typed pages of details about Abaddon and appropriate warnings. OK
lesson reinforced and better banishings before invocations to boot...(2)
When I was a Neophyte, during some of my astral work, there was one main time when a particular angel (gigantic in stature, holding me in the palm of his hand) stated firmly he was my HGA and gave me a test to confirm it. It took a few weeks, but I was able to unequivocally confirm the test. Fortunately, by that time I understood that what was meant was that my HGA was using the opportunity of my conversing with that particular Enochian angel to "step in" and address me. But the point of my telling the story right now is that I might have misunderstood and taken that Enochian angel's name as the Name of my HGA. (I didn't, but could have, and that would have been a mistake.)Stuff happens along the way. One has to have a bit of humility and perspective when interacting with it.
-
Funny, I had a similar experience, only the name that rang out was Horus. I'd have to go digging in my MD, but I recall writing that it must have been a product of a meditation I had been doing previously. Never actually thought that the HGA might have a name as such, as I've always thought of the HGA as me. Onion-Peelings comes to mind from Liber 333.
-
@FiliusBestia said
"Never actually thought that the HGA might have a name as such, as I've always thought of the HGA as me. Onion-Peelings comes to mind from Liber 333."
Learning the distinctive name of one's HGA is also learning the fundamental formula of one's own magick. It's a critical step.
You may want to read Crowley's Scholion to Liber Samekh. There are important discussions therein that you appear to have missed.
-
I recall now reading that some time back. Been a while, and I've been off on other things. Thanks. I guess it slipped right past me.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"A couple of examples from my own life that might give some insight (or at least a chuckle!).
(1)
When I was a Probationer, I customarily did Tarot readings with a preliminary invocation over the deck that would include a phrase referring to "my Holy Guardian Angel, whatever be Thy Name." One day, on inwardly reciting this, a voice clear as can be instantly responded: "Abaddon." - Well (I thought naively and ignorantly), this is something! I wrote it up in the diary, and I sent a letter about it off to Soror Meral, who soon responded with three or four typed pages of details about Abaddon and appropriate warnings. OK lesson reinforced and better banishings before invocations to boot..."Abaddon has relevance to my own experiences. Can you share any of the details or appropriate warnings you were given?
-
@JoeRDollar said
"Abaddon has relevance to my own experiences. Can you share any of the details or appropriate warnings you were given?"
Phyllis wrote a long letter alomost 30 years ago. I'm sure I have it in a diary someplace. But the gist was: This ain't no HGA, and (though called an angel) ain't no angel in any conventional sense.
Abaddon is the "angel of the pit," the dragger down of souls into torment, etc. etc. (Standard research, including in the Thelemic holy books, will show this.)
Now, I'm not saying that Abaddon's appearance was invalid or a problem except it would have been a major (possibly catastrophic) problem if I'd accepted him as my HGA. Major delusion, probably would have knocked me off track for years (maybe an incarnation?
)PS - Here's one example, from Liber LXV 4:34-36:
"34. On the threshold stood the fulminant figure of Evil, the Horror of emptiness, with his ghastly eyes like poisonous wells. He stood, and the chamber was corrupt; the air stank. He was an old and gnarled fish more hideous than the shells of Abaddon.
-
He enveloped me with his demon tentacles; yea, the eight fears took hold upon me.
-
But I was anointed with the right sweet oil of the Magister; I slipped from the embrace as a stone from the sling of a boy of the woodlands."
On the particular subject of HGA, this equates Abaddon with the Dweller on the Threshold, the false experience that stands exactly in the way of connection to the HGA.
-
-
JAE, 93,
"the Dweller on the Threshold, the false experience that stands exactly in the way of connection to the HGA."
Could you say more about it being false? As this comes up, it obviously has relevance, since the presence/energy is potent, and arises out of the work the aspirant is performing. There would thus be a phase when working with the Dweller is important, if only because of how it is going to transform or give way to serious inklings of the HGA.
93 93.93,
Edward
-
And is the Dweller related to the Shadow?
-
@Edward Mason said
"
"the Dweller on the Threshold, the false experience that stands exactly in the way of connection to the HGA."Could you say more about it being false? As this comes up, it obviously has relevance, since the presence/energy is potent, and arises out of the work the aspirant is performing. There would thus be a phase when working with the Dweller is important, if only because of how it is going to transform or give way to serious inklings of the HGA."
For a given individual, there may or may not be a stage where actually working with the Dweller is important. (I think this is true more times than not but, still, needed to make that distinction.)
But I don't think "relevance" can be the standard for Truth here. The underlying question is: What is THE name of of one's HGA (which is also one's own unique, distinctive formula of the Great Work). by "false" I mean "not true."
-
I have long been intrigued by line 36 of LXV 4 ("But I was anointed with the right sweet oil of the Magister; ..."). It seem to me that the "oil" referred to here might refer to a few different things. Could it refer to a lack of attachment/aversion to one's own fears, preventing them from taking hold and turning into obsession?
Also, maybe, the ability to let go of the urge to ascribe a particular phenomena to a specific result? It seems like the experience of K&C itself would leave no room for any question as to its validity. If, short of that experience, there's no point at which you say "OK, that was definitely K&C with my HGA", there would be no danger of accepting the dweller as your HGA.
I ask because I want to make sure that I'm not missing something essential.
-
@Herr Meow said
"I have long been intrigued by line 36 of LXV 4 ("But I was anointed with the right sweet oil of the Magister; ..."). It seem to me that the "oil" referred to here might refer to a few different things. Could it refer to a lack of attachment/aversion to one's own fears, preventing them from taking hold and turning into obsession?"
You're right that the exact form of this, in a given situation, could take different forms. The simple thing that can be said is that "oil" here means Neshamah. What effect this "anointing" by Neshamah has will vary with person and circumstances. (What you suggest is an effect, not a cause, I think.)
"If, short of that experience, there's no point at which you say "OK, that was definitely K&C with my HGA", there would be no danger of accepting the dweller as your HGA."
I'm confused. How are you differentiating these two things? Only by an intellectual decision? "Accepting the dweller as your HGA" (in any practical way that I can understand those words) amounts to binding your being in intimate union with an error. I'd call that "danger."
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm confused. How are you differentiating these two things? Only by an intellectual decision? "Accepting the dweller as your HGA" (in any practical way that I can understand those words) amounts to binding your being in intimate union with an error. I'd call that "danger.""
My thinking was that, by refusing to identify any experience partaking of the nature of form (ie: anything partaking of the nature of Yetzirah) with K&C, the possibility of confusing the dweller and the HGA could be avoided.
From your comment above, I get the impression that the key to avoiding confusion between the dweller and the Angel is to look through the eyes of the Neschamah as opposed to the Ruach. In other words, the dweller speaks to the Ruach (or some aspects thereof), whereas the HGA speaks to the Neschamah.
-
@Herr Meow said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm confused. How are you differentiating these two things? Only by an intellectual decision? "Accepting the dweller as your HGA" (in any practical way that I can understand those words) amounts to binding your being in intimate union with an error. I'd call that "danger.""My thinking was that, by refusing to identify any experience partaking of the nature of form (ie: anything partaking of the nature of Yetzirah) with K&C, the possibility of confusing the dweller and the HGA could be avoided."
I'm not at all sure that's right - especially because the dweller sits exactly on the threshold.
Perhaps more importantlym I'm not sure it's relevant here. This kind of misstep might be (very broadly) compared to a really bad LSD trip: It's about the imprinting, and the subtle decisions that are made during the experience. These can affect sub-consciousness for years after. - I'm mostly saying that the subtle, rapid decisions made in the face of this specific experience are unusually impactful (much more so than in most other experiences).
"From your comment above, I get the impression that the key to avoiding confusion between the dweller and the Angel is to look through the eyes of the Neschamah as opposed to the Ruach. In other words, the dweller speaks to the Ruach (or some aspects thereof), whereas the HGA speaks to the Neschamah."
I wouldn't argue with the first sentence, but I can't agree with the second one.
For one thing, long before the K&C the HGA may be communicating directly through subconsciousness in a way that arises into Ruach consciousness as dialogue (this is a particularly common 1=10 occurrence). The HGA doesn't speak to Neshamah except in the Master - one might better say, I think, speaks through Neshamah to subconsciousness. Again, read AC's comments on Liber Samekh: the primary permanent consequence of even the K&C is the permanent establishment of a channel from Neshamah to Nephesh (that is, of superconsciousness into subconsciousness), which is the domain wherein the K&C occurs.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm not at all sure that's right - especially because the dweller sits exactly on the threshold."
Heh - it's amazing how easy it is for me to read a phrase or title hundreds of times and yet still neglect to pay attention to the exact wording
@Jim Eshelman said
"It's about the imprinting, and the subtle decisions that are made during the experience."
The decisions, in this case, having to do with a mistaken equation between the dweller and the most primal expression of self?
-
@Herr Meow said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"It's about the imprinting, and the subtle decisions that are made during the experience."The decisions, in this case, having to do with a mistaken equation between the dweller and the most primal expression of self?"
I go out of my way, usually, not to characterize what the HGA is.
Let's at least say: Mistakenly embracing the Dweller (or some other shadow-antithesis - what I'm in the habit of calling the Anti-Angel or "Unholy Stalking Demon") as that to which one molds oneself unreservedly, at the deepest accessible levels of oneself.
-
That answers my question pretty well. Thank you for your responses.
-
JAE 93,
"Again, read AC's comments on Liber Samekh: the primary permanent consequence of even the K&C is the permanent establishment of a channel from Neshamah to Nephesh (that is, of superconsciousness into subconsciousness), which is the domain wherein the K&C occurs."
There was a description of someone's K&C published in Black Pearl No. 6, which was very visceral. Are you saying there isn't much verbal/Ruach stuff happening, but rather the instincts and senses would receive the primary impact of the experience, with critical thinking and other Ruach phenomena presumably following after?
93 93/93,
Edward
-
@Edward Mason said
"There was a description of someone's K&C published in Black Pearl No. 6, which was very visceral. Are you saying there isn't much verbal/Ruach stuff happening, but rather the instincts and senses would receive the primary impact of the experience, with critical thinking and other Ruach phenomena presumably following after?"
With the caveat that each person's experience is their own...
Broadly speaking, yeah, there's substantial displacement of Ruach. One way Crowley described this was, "the death of his old mind save in so far as his unconscious elements preserve its memory when they absorb it." And the essential characteristic of the experience is its extreme level of intimacy.
It took me years after the K&C to actually realize something consciously that I think should have been evident to me years before the experience. I was musing one day about why so many of the symbols regarding crossing the Abyss were Air related and, more generally, Ruach related. During this reflection, while thinking about contrasts and comparisons with the K&C, I realized that most of the symbols of that event are actually sublime expressions of Nephesh symbols - for example, most of them reduce to symbols of sexual union. And then it hit me: Yes, the fundamental accomplishment in the K&C is the permanent, unshakable establishment of the Angel in union with subconscious. Now, note that I'm not saying this is unconscious, in the sense of "unaware," because the Adept is consciously participating in the realm of subconsciousness. (This is the explanation of several things Crowley wrote over the years that have proven true in experience, e.g., that training in the Body of Light is the threshold experience in the approach to the HGA; and this differentiates the HGA experience of the Neophyte 1=10 from that of the Zelator 2=9; and so forth and so on.)
One way to say this symbolically is that one's subconsciousness is forged into the sanctuary where the Angel is received, and the Adept (like the heroes of many a saga) journeys into that hidden lair, past its dragons etc., to enter the sanctuary and into union with the Angel in a fashion most characterized by the place of meeting: That is, by overwhelming, self-displacing intimacy. And, having long drilled in the ability to have self-conscious and subconscious content coexist in waking times, the Adept is, theraefter, but a whisper away from the voice of the Angel - consciously and at will under the Angel's direction.
This leaves the appropriate heroically established Ruach to carry out the work of Adepthood. But, eventually, in one lifetime or another, this, too, must expire. Arthur, the Sun-King, eventually will fight his last battle, his heart pierced, his blood all spent, and (the key!) his sword hurled into the ancient waters from which it emerged, his his remnants born across the Great Waters by the three-fold goddess.
-
JAE 93,
Thank you.
There has been so much said over the years that states or implies that K&C is Ruach-based - words spoken to listener, information passing into rational consciousness, an experience that is observed in some way ... and so on. This places K&C into a very different context.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
As I say any chance I get
, "Knowledge & Conversation" does not mean "Facts & Chat."Now, things are consciously known, because ego-consciousness enters into and collaborates with subconsciousness. But, for example, one doesn't have to make it 'conscious' all at once. One form is that subconsciousness is imprinted with a whole body of knowledge (or, rather, with a complete pattern of a thing), and self-consciousness is able to access and draw on this as needed.
But the experience ... well, it's not for nothing that it's most often compared to nuptials.
I think the origin of the ideas you cite are two-fold. One big source is the original Golden Dawn. Their 5=6 grade was not at all the 5=6 of the A.'.A.'.. It more resembled (by work undertaken) an A.'.A.'. Neophyte 1=10 or (by symbolism) an A.'.A.'. Zelator 2=9. Many of its members had sufficently developed intuition (in the sense of inner-tuition) that, given teh contemporary meaning of "knowledge" and "conversation," their inner verbal guidance dialogues came to be thought of as K&C. This is, in fact, a common phenomenon for the A.'.A.'. 1=10 level - the so-called "Vision of Adonai" which (by most reports I've received from others) is more commonly auditory than visual.
The second cause is similar but more modern and less Golden Dawny. It's that people progress in the Work a little bit and have a very significant experience, a real sense of inner communion with something they trust and which guides them correctly. Because (again) of the contemporary meanings of "knowledge" and "conversation," and absence guidance from someone further along the Path, they take this to be the K&C. But, again, it's a much earlier step.
Despite the anti-Christian reactivity of many Thelemites, I turn to an important, beautiful Christian hymn for the best description I know of this fulfilled A.'.A.'. 1=10 experience. It's a hymn that has always moved me, and which captures this better than any other writing I've ever encountered. The song is "In the Garden" by C. Austin Miles, and I might as well reproduce the lyrics. (What follows is from Ray Charles' arrangement for Perry Como. I have substituted "The Sun, my God," for "The Son of God.")
"I come to the garden alone,
While the dew is still on the roses,
And the voice I hear falling on my ear,
[The Sun, my God] discloses.And He walks with me, and He talks with me,
And He tells me I am His own,
And the joy we share as we tarry there,
None other, has ever, known!He speaks and the sound of His voice,
Is so sweet the birds hush their singing,
And the melody that he gave to me,
Within my heart is ringing.And He walks with me, and He talks with me,
And He tells me I am His own,
And the joy we share as we tarry there,
None other, has ever, known! ..."