Your HGA's name
-
I remember Crowley being besides himself with joy when discovering via Greek gematria that Aiwaz = 418... So if the gematria of the HGA reveals True Will, the particular aspect of the Great Work one should be doing, are there any other techniques prior to KCHGA to approach the data on True Will? Could one, for example, do a gematria on the concept that one believes to be his or her True Will and gain an inkling of the HGA's name - or is that a road to self-deception?
Also, a slight off-tangent question. If True Will is unique for each person, is there not also an element of one's True Will that universally applies to all as well? I cannot help but think True Will is both unique and universal at the same time.. and it's that last aspect, the universality of it, that I'm interested in ascertaining..
-
Would it be any less true or less individual if it just happened to be identical?
-
Ok, that makes sense.
Which leads to my next question. If True Will is both individual and universal, why all the secrecy around the HGA?
-
@he atlas itch said
"Ok, that makes sense."
Actually, I didn't make a statement. I asked a question. Whatever you think makes sense is whatever you thought up yourself
"Which leads to my next question. If True Will is both individual and universal, why all the secrecy around the HGA?"
I'm not sure what your question is; or, for that matter, what one necessarily has to do with the other.
-
It's hard not to see how True Will is not both personal and universal given its grounding in Chokmah/Chiah. Unless one would want to argue that 418/Abrahadabra is a formula only for Crowley. The way I understand it, the particular focus of a person's True Will is unique for that person, in terms of why they incarnated, but it also applies on a universal level ("the Great Work").
So, my question is, if my True Will is ultimately not just for myself, but for all of humanity, and the name of my HGA will reveal the specifics of my True Will's formula, why has there traditionally been all this secrecy around attainment of the HGA? What is the logic for this secrecy - especially when Crowley himself did not stick to silence on his HGA's name and formula?
-
@he atlas itch said
"So, my question is, if my True Will is ultimately not just for myself, but for all of humanity,"
It is.
"and the name of my HGA will reveal the specifics of my True Will's formula,"
It probablty won't. It reveals the key to your personal magical formula, but not necessarily an articulation of your True Will. (At least, in the handful of cases where all the facts of both are known to me, the Angel's name is not an articulation of the True Will without a pretty big stretch.)
To take one concrete example. It is clear that "Aiwass" A 93-418 embodied formulae critical to Crowley. But his True Will was "To teach the Next Step" ('Next Step' originally being understood as the K&C of the HGA, and later as the establishment of the Law of Thelema). The name "Aiwass" does not (by its letters or numeration or literal meaning) express the specific idea, "To teach the Next Step."
"why has there traditionally been all this secrecy around attainment of the HGA? What is the logic for this secrecy - especially when Crowley himself did not stick to silence on his HGA's name and formula?"
Many reasons. They generall deal with the fact that this Name is the most intimate connection of one's existence. It is symbolically equivalent to that "true name" that (as magick tradition accurately tells us) someone who knows it could have all power over you. It is something sacred beyond measure and, therefore, the thing (for you) that it would be most easy for someone else to blaspheme.
As for Crowley's decisions... I can't speak for him. I can guess, though, that the main point was that the name Aiwass had been made public in Liber Legis years before. The cow was out of the barn. He did, however, keep his Adeptus Minor magical motto secret until the day he died (even though he signed one early writing with it).
-
Thanks Jim for that explanation. Btw like Iugum, I would also be interested to hear any tips on discovering one’s personal formula.
If I can clarify one minor point that I, and I’m sure others, have puzzled about – namely how Crowley came to realize that Aiwaz was his HGA. The following is my interpretation and I would be interested in feedback.
When Crowley was doing the Aiwaz invocations with Soror Fidelis, he came to realize that these communications were false. He then commenced to complete the Abramelin Operation solo. After 31 weeks of daily invoking, he attained to his HGA – which he describes as his consciousness merging with the universe and an illumination lasting for 3 weeks that everyone passing by him on the street noticed. It is obvious (to me, at least) that he is referring to full-blown kundalini illumination. Now one of the characteristics of this illumination is that it stirs up a lot of buried emotional stuff in the subconscious and long-held attitudes toward certain issues can suddenly reverse, leading to the opposite realization. Crowley wrote somewhere (I roughly paraphrase) that trances transcend dualities in the mind and lead to their reintegration on a higher level of awareness..
So my guess is, Crowley’s kundalini illumination must have led to the sudden realization that Aiwaz and Liber Legis, two things he hitherto felt strong resistance toward, was indeed his HGA and Liber Legis linked to his True Will.
Of course the above – in terms of how Crowley came to realize Aiwaz was his HGA - is never stated explicitly anywhere as far as I’m aware. Its strictly my interpretation, but I would be interested to know if that 1) corresponds with the known facts and 2) whether others find this interpretation plausible.
-
@he atlas itch said
"Thanks Jim for that explanation. Btw like Iugum, I would also be interested to hear any tips on discovering one’s personal formula"
Hard to summarize. I suppose an entire book is warranted on it sometime, but I haven't a clue when I might write it.
Though individual paths to this will (and do) vary, to give an idea of the scope of the question in general, Temple of Thelema's entire First Order is aimed, in many respects, at this one goal. We take five degrees to get someone ripe for this question - which is a primary part of their Work in the sixth (i.e., Portal). To give the answer I'd really like to give in this, I'd first have to somehow recreate for you the experience of passing through those degrees and getting to the exact inner position where the question becomes clear. (Wish I knew how to do that without you passing through the degrees... but tickled that we know how to do it reliably for those who do.)
"If I can clarify one minor point that I, and I’m sure others, have puzzled about – namely how Crowley came to realize that Aiwaz was his HGA. The following is my interpretation and I would be interested in feedback."
This becomes evident in the ongoing communion with the Angel; but he was told many times from many sources. (There's even a place in The Vision & the Voice where he's told it outright.) I think your proposed explanation is too complicated and that it's not really a big puzzle.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"This becomes evident in the ongoing communion with the Angel; but he was told many times from many sources."
Besides Vision & Voice, do you recall offhand the texts where Crowley mentions being told that Aiwaz is his HGA? I don't remember coming across this.
Crowley's thoughts on the HGA evolved over time, from Silent Self to an objective individual. Indeed I find opinions on the HGA vary from person to person. For example Gunther suggests the HGA is identical to the Egyptian ka or double, which seems very different from the idea of an objective individual like Aiwass.
It would be useful to place dates on Crowley's comments up until the comment in Book 4 where he acknowledges "I now incline to believe that Aiwass is not only a God or Demon or Devil once held holy in Sumer, and mine own Guardian Angel, but also a man as I am..."
-
@he atlas itch said
"Besides Vision & Voice, do you recall offhand the texts where Crowley mentions being told that Aiwaz is his HGA? I don't remember coming across this. "
No. It's been too long, and they were any number of occasions. You can probably find some comments scattered through Magick in Theory & Practice.
"It would be useful to place dates on Crowley's comments up until the comment in Book 4 where he acknowledges "I now incline to believe that Aiwass is not only a God or Demon or Devil once held holy in Sumer, and mine own Guardian Angel, but also a man as I am...""
Why would that be useful? (That's a serious question. I fail to see that it matters a whit for anything.)
-
Cool! I just found this place and the first forum topic I click on is discussing something I have been curious about for over a year now.
I am not sure but I think HGA = Holy Guardian Angel?
At any rate, just out of the blue (I had not pursued this in any way) I had a dream where two angels were 'introduced' to me and I heard their names and I wrote them down and I looked them up later and lo and behold they are actual angels from Hebrew lore. They aren't any of the Archangels or anything like that... just a couple of the worker bees. I have no clue what any of this is about. This came on the heels of a couple OBE type events and a realization that I needed to get my spiritual-seeker butt back in gear again.
Is there a FAQ that might have some discussion of this?
Lab.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
Why would that be useful? (That's a serious question. I fail to see that it matters a whit for anything.)"
Jim – I find it hard to believe that you do not consider ascertaining Crowley’s comments on the nature of the HGA to be of importance. The fact is, Crowley gave different opinions on the HGA as he evolved. His mature considered opinion at the end of his life was that the HGA was an a priori objective individual. He also denounced the view of the HGA as one’s Higher Self as a “heretical and dangerous self-delusion”. These are strong words. So clearly Crowley himself deemed the identity of the HGA to be of central importance.
For myself, Crowley’s comments upon completion of the Abramelin Operation clearly refer to full-blown kundalini illumination. This makes sense to me. I can believe part of the experience might entail hearing a distinct voice in one’s head, a vision of the HGA, revelation of a personal magickal formula, lucid dreams, the awakening of various siddhi powers, sudden realizations about oneself, among many other distinct signs – physical and otherwise. This experience, which has been well-documented over and over, would suggest the view of the HGA as Higher Self.
Now I can accept your explanation for why one should keep the name of one’s HGA and personal formula a secret. On the other hand I cannot help but feel that Crowley’s tendency to clam up about his kundalini illumination, saying it is too sacred (cf. his comments toward the end of John St. John or upon completion of Abramelin), has more to do with the fact little was known about the phenomenon at his time and he himself was not really sure of what he was experiencing. The times have changed, however, and there are now numerous books published on the subject, with courses available to those interested. Our knowledge of kundalini has evolved and become more sophisticated. Yes, there are serious and real dangers involved in the awakening of the serpent energy as illustrated by Sri Gopi’s autobiography.
What I really don’t understand is how Crowley moved from this experience of kundalini into the assertion that Aiwaz as an objective individual was his HGA. Maybe that’s a comment that only makes sense upon attainment to 8=3. The only way I can reconcile this notion of HGA as Higher Self vs objective individual is by regarding the Higher Self (kundalini) as the first stage of KCHGA. The point of crossing the Abyss would therefore be to discover the objective nature of the HGA – as a Supernal entity.
So the "usefulness" of putting dates to Crowley's comments on the HGA, lies in matching them to his attainment of various grades. I suspect the transition from 7=4 to 8=3 is a key point and source of much confusion.
-
As I see it, KCHGA would entail access to the collective unconscious and acquiring understanding of the universe. This is where the HGA as Higher Self is directly teaching the adept about the nature of reality - books and gurus no longer required.
This stage is then finally ratified by the adept crossing the Abyss into objective reality. This is where the HGA is discovered to be an objective individual.
-
@he atlas itch said
"Jim – I find it hard to believe that you do not consider ascertaining Crowley’s comments on the nature of the HGA to be of importance."
He said so many things so often - and intentionally targetted his communications to individuals etc. You can't line them up all next to each other and put them on a time line or some such thing. He did change his view across time, but he also said one thing to the Adeptus Minor, another thing to the tyro, and mostly went out of his way never to leave anyone with a definitive "this pins it down" statement about any of it.
So, no. It's all lies (in the technical sense that this word is used by the Magus). The point is to have the experience, not to figure it out in advance.
"The fact is, Crowley gave different opinions on the HGA as he evolved."
I diagree. He gave different opinions depending on who he was writing for or talking to.
"For myself, Crowley’s comments upon completion of the Abramelin Operation clearly refer to full-blown kundalini illumination."
My reading of his subtle notes is that Crowley had major kundalini experiences before he ever joined the GD, meaning about a decade before he had K&C. More broadly, a number of people have reported kundalini breakthroughs concurrent with the K&C (Phyllis Seckler being one example), but these tend to be people who haven't had that result before - the two aren't linked - but yes, it does appear that if you haven't had the one energy break through by the time of the K&C, that this tends to happen then also. (In the A.'.A.'. system, one has the kundalini result at least by 3=8 before moving to 4=7, and most people have it much earlier than that.)
"What I really don’t understand is how Crowley moved from this experience of kundalini into the assertion that Aiwaz as an objective individual was his HGA."
He wrote that in Magick Without Tears. I totally disagree that the key here is that it was his end of life view. I am certain that the key is that it was his one book written for the absolute tyro - the complete beginner. I would put that side-by-side with Liber Samekh, which was written for the 5=6.
All of this argument or discussion misses what I think are the two practical points:
(1) Nobody knows nor can devine the formula by which another attains to the K&C. It is, therefore, of great importance not to impose a specific definition or point of view about it that could misdirect some subset of aspirants.
(2) The K&C occurs within the context of Briatic consciousness. Within Briah, there is no longer any sense of separation between two things, even when there are distinctive representations of separate things. Therefore, in the experience of the K&C it has become essentially irrelevant whether it is a separate or discrete being, because there is no longer any true separation even between (apparently) discrete beings.To put the second point differently: By the time the answer actually matters in any sense, it no longer matters! By the time one has the K&C, the point has become moot. Before that... hell, it's all theory, with the standard problems of that.
BTW (depending on the quote you are considering), I think you'll find, on closer scrutiny, that AC didn't say simply that the HGA is a separate being. He said something to the effect that the HGA is a separate being exactly in the sense that you and I are separate beings. Exactly in that sense. Not in some other sense.
"The only way I can reconcile this notion of HGA as Higher Self vs objective individual is by regarding the Higher Self (kundalini) as the first stage of KCHGA. The point of crossing the Abyss would therefore be to discover the objective nature of the HGA – as a Supernal entity."
I smell too much theory here. Too much effort to wrap words around something that somebody else has experienced.
-
Talk about timing. Every morning when I open up Jung, I read about the archetype I dreamed of the night before. And every time I open up one of these threads I read about something I am just thinking about.
Just now reading the posts on Kundalini, right as I read the word "kundalini", I have the most intense kundalini experience ever. A white hot sword of energy ascends my spine, literally forcing my back and head into alignment, and bursting through my crown chakra. wow.
Thanks!
(and, considering that I'm not anywhere "near" K&C, this would tend to corroborate Jim's description of it commonly happening way earlier on the path
) -
@AvshalomBinyamin said
"A white hot sword of energy ascends my spine, literally forcing my back and head into alignment, and bursting through my crown chakra. wow.
Thanks!
"
That's cool. Keep going til you plug into planetary consciousness
Jim - thanks for clarifying kundalini and KCHGA are not necessarily the same thing. I finally had time to track down quotes. The passage I’m thinking of in MWT states:
*I have tended rather to elaborate this theme, because of the one personally important question which arises in more recent letters; for I believe that the Holy Guardian Angel is a Being of this order. He is something more than a man, possibly a being who has already passed through the stage of humanity, and his peculiarly intimate relationship with his client is that of friendship, of community, of brotherhood, or Fatherhood. He is not, let me say with emphasis, a mere abstraction from yourself; and that is why I have insisted rather heavily that the term "Higher Self" implies "a damnable heresy and a dangerous delusion."
It it were not so, there would be no point in The Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage.
Apart from any theoretical speculation, my Sammasiti and analytical work has never led to so much as a hint of the existence of the Guardian Angel. He is not to be found by any exploration of oneself. It is true that the process of analysis leads finally to the realization of oneself as no more than a point of view indistinguishable in itself from any other point of view; but the Holy Guardian Angel is in precisely the same position. However close may be the identities in millions of ways, no complete identification is ever obtainable.
But do remember this, above all else; they are objective, not subjective, or I should not waste good Magick on them.*
hermetic.com/crowley/magick-without-tears/mwt_43.html
I don't find Crowley’s reasons for insisting on the “objectivity” of the HGA in this passage from MWT to be particularly convincing. So I can accept his comments have a strategic purpose toward a complete beginner – i.e. not to get lost in subjective ideas of the HGA, but to push oneself toward a distinct experience. I compared this passage against Liber Samekh, which is essentially an invocation of the entire inner planes, with the HGA being identified with Kether. The scope of Samekh would suggest the HGA is not the Higher Self per se, but an irreducible point dissolving the boundary between subject and object.
Given the warnings against mixing the inner planes, can you describe the characteristics falling under the term “Knowledge and Conversation” and how one is supposed to deal with this Briatic awareness? I’ve had experiences where there seemed to be no distinction between my inner private world and external world – it felt like I was losing my mind. Whatever I was thinking of seemed to “exteriorize” in the objective world. I’m wondering if “Knowledge and Conversation” means 1) knowledge of the connection between one’s inner world and exterior world and 2) learning to converse with reality, i.e. recognizing these external signs and responding accordingly?
-
@he atlas itch said
"That's cool. Keep going til you plug into planetary consciousness
"I'll probably understand this later on down the road. So far, I think that the experience I had on Saturday was the opening of the Muladhara chakra, and an indicator that I've been part-way successful at my task of 'letting go'.
-
@he atlas itch said
"I finally had time to track down quotes. The passage I’m thinking of in MWT states..."
As mentioned before, I think MWT should be interpreted as "advice to rank beginners who maybe haven't even started keeping a diary yet," rather than "Crowley's latest and greatest opinion."
"I don't find Crowley’s reasons for insisting on the “objectivity” of the HGA in this passage from MWT to be particularly convincing."
No. I think they miss the relevant issues altogether. For example, the claim "if I didn't think it was objective, I wouldn't waste good magick on it" is silly - and contrary to the main position of core instructions like Liber O which are based on the idea that "a particular method produces a particular result - don't worry about the theory of it all." The purpose of using the magick is to produce the result, not "because of This or That." (The theory is irrelevant to the result unless the theory affects the application of the method.)
Also, the subjective vs. objective argument falls apart if we agree to the limited idea that the HGA is not "ourselves" in any sense that we normally mean by "ourselves."
"Given the warnings against mixing the inner planes, can you describe the characteristics falling under the term “Knowledge and Conversation” and how one is supposed to deal with this Briatic awareness?"
LOL, you're asking for a manual on Life Beginning At Tiphereth.
I'm not sure what "deal with this Briatic awareness" means. One first needs to awaken it (which the work up through Dominus Liminis accomplishes).
Characteristics under K&C: I go very far out of my way not to do this most of the time, because the nature of the experience is so personal. I'll point you in the right direction, though, by saying it's essential characteristic is intimacy of a type and scope never previously experienced.
"I’m wondering if “Knowledge and Conversation” means 1) knowledge of the connection between one’s inner world and exterior world and 2) learning to converse with reality, i.e. recognizing these external signs and responding accordingly?"
Don't interpret "knowledge" as having anything to do with facts, data, etc. It's an older use, and means sexual union - preserved in the modern "carnal knowledge," but also found in the older forms such as "Adam knew Eve."
-
Thanks for sharing that.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
Also, the subjective vs. objective argument falls apart if we agree to the limited idea that the HGA is not "ourselves" in any sense that we normally mean by "ourselves."...Characteristics under K&C: I go very far out of my way not to do this most of the time, because the nature of the experience is so personal. I'll point you in the right direction, though, by saying it's essential characteristic is intimacy of a type and scope never previously experienced.
...Don't interpret "knowledge" as having anything to do with facts, data, etc. It's an older use, and means sexual union - preserved in the modern "carnal knowledge," but also found in the older forms such as "Adam knew Eve.""
Hi Jim
I hate to keep asking questions on this point, but what you're describing above sounds like kundalini illumination. The characteristics of it are:
- it's intimate and highly sexual
- the sense of self and world is radically altered
- all of the above occurs in a type and scope never previously experienced before - it's a very real experience.
- often there is an awakening of siddhi powers, with physical symptoms that can last for years
But if kundalini and KCHGA are not the same, it would be helpful to have a few hints to distinguish the latter from the former...