"The Next Step" of previous Aeons.
-
I remember Jim saying at some point that humanity's "Next Step" for this Aeon was the K&CHGA - I assume this means attaining Tiphareth.
I have to wonder, then, what the "Next Step" for the Aeon of Osiris was (I doubt any of us could add anything really meaningful about the Aeon of Isis in this regard, but maybe I'm wrong).
Any thoughts, anyone?
-
Just earlier tonight I read Initiation in the Aeon of the Child, by a fellow named Gunther. In it he points out that Crowley appears to have considered one of his greatest tasks, received from the "secret chiefs," to teach the world precisely how to cross the abyss. He argues that the next step for the Aeon of Osiris was the K&C, while the nest step in the Aeon of Horus is crossing to Binah. The child returns to the mothers womb.
In the old Aeon initiation followed this symbolic path, says Gunther: life, death, rebirth. In this Aeon you might say things have been turned on their heads.... our formulae are averse compared to the old ones.
Now the symbolic path we follow along the road of initiation is: death, birth, life. In this Aeon, says Gunther, the apex of initiation "isn't catastrophic." It isn't necessary to experience death for our attainment, it is the place from where we start, born as the child with potential, and yearning for Her.
Anyways I just read it tonight so I haven't "digested" it. I will say that it's the most interesting work I've seen the caliphate promote, other than Crowley's own.
-cody 93 93/93
-
@Ash said
"I remember Jim saying at some point that humanity's "Next Step" for this Aeon was the K&CHGA - I assume this means attaining Tiphareth.
I have to wonder, then, what the "Next Step" for the Aeon of Osiris was (I doubt any of us could add anything really meaningful about the Aeon of Isis in this regard, but maybe I'm wrong).
Any thoughts, anyone?"
Attaining to Yetzirah: conscious, abstract thought and, therefore, language (and much of what we think of as 'civilization').
One thing I wonder is what K&C will look like when it becomes more of a baseline developmental stage. Historically, people who attain to K&C were exceptional figures, and I wonder how much of that was about K&C, and how much of it was flavored by their individual genius.
For example, while Yetziratic consciousness is pretty standard for most humans, a lot of us have very few intelligent sentences to say, in comparison to many of the exceptional people who mastered language thousands of years ago.
I can imagine, that as more and more attain to K&C, both the work to get there, and the work produced after, may become less and less 'impressive'. Eventually, it becomes a standard 'rite of passage' for young adults, like college. Then it becomes a developmental stage like puberty, and we no longer look up to it from so far away. Instead, abyss crossing is the impressive "Next Step" that few successfully undertake.
"He argues that the next step for the Aeon of Osiris was the K&C, while the nest step in the Aeon of Horus is crossing to Binah. The child returns to the mothers womb."
The Next Step is all a matter of what step you're on. But the fact that only a small percentage of people have attained to K&C, seems to indicate that K&C is still very much a 'next step' for most of the world.
"It isn't necessary to experience death for our attainment, it is the place from where we start, born as the child with potential, and yearning for Her."
Also, death is one of the ways to cross the Veil of Paroketh, which is below Tiphareth. And death doesn't cause one to automatically cross to the supernal triad.
So it sounds like this placement of K&C and Abyss crossing are about an octave off, to me.
-
@poor+blind+misfi said
"In it he points out that Crowley appears to have considered one of his greatest tasks, received from the "secret chiefs," to teach the world precisely how to cross the abyss. He argues that the next step for the Aeon of Osiris was the K&C, while the nest step in the Aeon of Horus is crossing to Binah."
For the words "Next Step" to make any sense, the above would have to assume that everyone (let's say, everyone who had reached psychologically healthy adulthood) already had the K&C. This is most evidently not so.
-
That's a good point Jim.
To clarify for Gunther's sake, he never used the term next step, those were my words. Without going back to the book at this time, I believe he had it in mind that the crossing of the abyss, in the course of this Aeon (and not necessarily right now), would become the supreme attainment during the life of an adept, whereas before it had been the K&C.
I'm barely able to stand firm in Malkuth (I have malkooties), but it does make some sense to me that as over the years, as people add trial and error to this *scientific * illuminism, that it would become more of a sure thing for those who endured to actually attain, even if slowly, to ever greater "heights."
That is after all, the very way in which the Great Work is to heal mankind, isn't it? It seems to me the number of adepts who actually advance will always remain low. But as the adepts attain more, their influence will guide humanity to attaining at least a little more as a whole. If, for the next 2,000 years or so, the average adept attains just what she attained in days of old, who will have advanced?
-cody 93 93/93
-
@poor+blind+misfi said
"Without going back to the book at this time, I believe he had it in mind that the crossing of the abyss, in the course of this Aeon (and not necessarily right now), would become the supreme attainment during the life of an adept, whereas before it had been the K&C."
That's a very different statement than the one you made before
- especially with your word "supreme."In fact, it's at odds IMHO with the whole conversation around "Next Step." Crowley's way of teaching didn't focus on supreme or ultimate or final goals but, at each step of the way, on the next step.
It was with great intention that I used the word "step-by-step" in the subtitle of The Mystical & Magical System of the A.'.A.'..
-
"That's a very different statement than the one you made before
- especially with your word "supreme.""Yeah
But do you think this Aeon will bring about higher attainments for those who endure?
-cody 93 93/93
-
@poor+blind+misfi said
"
"That's a very different statement than the one you made before - especially with your word "supreme.""Yeah
But do you think this Aeon will bring about higher attainments for those who endure?"
It already does.
-
I've been following this thread and feeling it provided an interesting counterpoint to the related topic in the Magick folder on the influence of the last Aeon.
@Alrah said
"I find the observations of Ajahn Munindo interesting regarding the Jim's theory of 'the next step' of the new aeon. Munindo talks about how people found identity in their community, work and family much more than people do today, and says that nowerdays the ego is 'condensed' in the individual rather than being spread about. We 'promote' ourselves as individuals more - everyone has a facebook page or an online profile for example, and thus we define our identity more. He thinks this condensing of the ego increases the level of pressure and suffering on the average human being, and if that's true it may explain why more people are investigating spiritual paths in an attempt to alleviate their suffering."
What is being suggested here is that the emancipation of the individual, and its consequent hyper awareness of itself as distinct from larger structures, is a symptom of the new Aeon.
The other thread on the Magick forum seemed to revolve around the abuses of the last Aeon, its faults as a world view, its shadow.
The above post by Alrah seems to put the two together in my mind. It asserts that the rise of the individual as a thing, unique in the world, if not leavened by spiritual experience, has the potential of casting a very dark shadow.
There is also this tie in with those relatively recent, existential philosophies that came out of the post war periods in Europe—anarchists, absurdists, nihilists—lions, and tigers, and bears, oh my.
peach and 93
-
@RobertAllen said
"What is being suggested here is that the emancipation of the individual, and its consequent hyper awareness of itself as distinct from larger structures, is a symptom of the new Aeon. "
I tend to think of it as a symptom of the Old Aeon. It's intensely Osirian, i.e., egoic. (That was the species developmental task for the last aeon: distinguish yourself from the collective by distinctive ego-formation.)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@RobertAllen said
"What is being suggested here is that the emancipation of the individual, and its consequent hyper awareness of itself as distinct from larger structures, is a symptom of the new Aeon. "I tend to think of it as a symptom of the Old Aeon. It's intensely Osirian, i.e., egoic. (That was the species developmental task for the last aeon: distinguish yourself from the collective by distinctive ego-formation.)"
Somehow this seems wrong to me. I'm not arguing, I'm just having trouble resolving your statement with how I have always viewed the last Aeon.
Looking back (I'm talking about the West, specifically Europe) I see organizations like the Jesuits, which was all about the strength of the organization and the sublimation of the individual in a clear power structure. I also see the fierce efforts to suppress schismatic groups who found themselves 'outside' the establishment, like the Anabaptists. Obviously, It is my understanding that the previous Aeon did not encourage free thinkers—Luther risked his life to make a statement about the freedom of the individual. The exception to the rule was the Renaissance, but this explosion of personal freedoms and experimentation was short lived. The church and the monarchy both, viewed this energy as dangerous to their authority.
Before the twentieth century we had very few individuals. We had them, this is true, but the numbers suggest it was not very easy to distinguish yourself in this way. On the other hand, in the last fifty years the idea that you make you own destiny, that your life is a creative work, that it is yours and does not belong to the state, or the church, or the family, or a philosophy has gained significant traction (there are exceptions, but I feel that most of these are fueled by traditional perspectives that hearken back to the old Aeon). In India it was the caste system, but last year Bollywood produced Slum Dog Millionaire, which celebrates the individual as someone who is superior to his circumstances, a not very caste oriented perspective.
Okay, so now I've started airing my assumptions about this Aeon. We believe, even if it isn't the case in practice, that your father, or your mother does not fatally condemn you to a fixed station in life—you can be born a black man and still be elected president. Isn't this the triumph of the individual will we are talking about here; Horus, the lord of Force and Fire whose will is potent in this age? A secular reading of the concept perhaps, but there is going to be a secular manifestation of the current that will be void of the spiritual perspective, no?
We see ourselves as a Ulysses, as someone who has been turned many times by fate, and who has to invent their own way in the world.
I can accept the fact that my perspective is incomplete and superficial in some important aspect(s), but you have to give me something to think about that will help me see how this might be the case.
love and will
-
Try thinking of it in these terms: The developmental task of the Aeon of Osiris was the emergence of the individual.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Try thinking of it in these terms: The developmental task of the Aeon of Osiris was the emergence of the individual."
emote: opens mouth as if to speak and then abruptly shuts it.
The rooms sees:
RobertAllen opens his mouth as if to speak, and then abruptly shuts it.[long pause]
I could argue, but I know I would only be venting ego as a result of working myself into a lather with the last post.
-
so, we are now tasked with transcending this individuality?
-
@RobertAllen said
"so, we are now tasked with transcending this individuality?"
Yes.
And, one might say, for being singular-distinguished and collective-indistinguishable at the same time.
-
93,
Alrah said:
"I think it may be quite difficult to argue that human beings are evolving telepathic talents."
I knew you'd say that.Okay, now I'm close to being off-topic, too.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
93,
A friend of mine coined the word 'telempathy.' Or if he didn't, he stole it from someone who did. Anyway, there is anthropological data, especially from early 20th Century studies of Australian aborigines, that such a phenomenon occurs in certain close communities. People within tight sects and orders report it with some regularity. Actually transmitting words or thoughts is a rarer phenomenon, but what we call hunches or gut-feelings that pan out are common enough that I don't doubt their validity.
To what are we tuning in? Telempathy implies something on Nephesh-level: picking up sensations, strong emotions that generate some type of field we can sense if we're already simpatico with the other person or group. True telepathy would, I think, involve a higher level of the Ruach.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
@Edward Mason said
"93,
A friend of mine coined the word 'telempathy.' Or if he didn't, he stole it from someone who did. Anyway, there is anthropological data, especially from early 20th Century studies of Australian aborigines, that such a phenomenon occurs in certain close communities. People within tight sects and orders report it with some regularity. Actually transmitting words or thoughts is a rarer phenomenon, but what we call hunches or gut-feelings that pan out are common enough that I don't doubt their validity.
To what are we tuning in? Telempathy implies something on Nephesh-level: picking up sensations, strong emotions that generate some type of field we can sense if we're already simpatico with the other person or group. True telepathy would, I think, involve a higher level of the Ruach.
93 93/93,
Edward"
Yes, this is very much what I mean. I suspect it will have several channels of expression - visual sensations with some audio clues but less and less need for the verbosity appears to be growing in a large scale context. If we believe that everything needs to have materialistic evidences and measures, then we now should throw out Art with Spirituality and Psychology (as I would expect with a purely materialistic worldview).
-
@Alrah said
"Ok Takamba, but telepathy has not been scientifically proven as possible, has it? Until it is then any assertion that "telepathy is the one most obvious lateral benefits... becoming more and more active in the populations.." is going to crash into the cliffs of materialism!"
If God had wanted us to see in the dark, who would have someone invent a light bulb - but until then, it is scientifically impossible to prove the notion of seeing in the dark.
-
93,
"Well - playing devils advocate, the argument is now about the materialists stance versus the spiritual one, and that could go anywhere, but is so god damned dull, that I'd rather not play yet again from either side. I opt to take the third way and have them both."
I think that point has been made here before, but it bears repeating. What we now consider 'materialistic' would, for all practical purposes, have been considered pure magick, and thus materially impossible 150 years ago. At one point, it was scientifically proven that the human brain could not function if the body it was in was traveling at more than 30 mph. And we all know that heavier-than-air flight was shown, repeatedly, to be an impossibility. Etc. etc.
The real enemy of materialism isn't credulity, but creative human imagination.
93 93/93,
Edward