Probationary work clarifications
-
Rifraff,
It is a tadd "odd" isn't it? I joined into the Motta lineage, and the one who accepted my Oath also accepted that I have been practicing magick for 10 years, and after several discussions, he deemed that it was unecessary for me to go through the Student phase. In his own words (after I inquired about being a Student or Probationer),
"I rarely use the Student phase; which isn't traditional as you happen to remark. In the seventies e.v. no lineage at all was using it. I do find it useful for certain aspirants; but certainly not in your case who -- by your own word -- have studied for 10 years."
I wanted to join the Jane Wolfe lineage, which is why I was inquiring. Thanks to my inquiry, another member here of the Motta lineage replied to me, and led me to the one who accepted me. This is what I have worked for and studyed for, and practiced for my whole adult life. You know, in closing letters, we use the statement, "Fraternally," and I am estatic that this man chose to recognize my hard work, and offensive that someone here meets my claim with suspicion. That's not very Fraternal is it?
-
The Studentship is "traditional" but Crowley approached it differently with different people at various points in his life. The whole point is to make sure someone has a basis to which to begin their studies from, a broad/good basis, and to show that they're capable of doing the work, and if this can be deemed without an official "Studentship", then I don't see what the problem is.
-
@Frater Pramudita said
"Rifraff,
It is a tadd "odd" isn't it? I joined into the Motto lineage, and the one who accepted my Oath also accepted that I have been practicing magick for 10 years, and after several discussions, he deemed that it was unecessary for me to go through the Student phase. In his own words (after I inquired about being a Student or Probationer),
"I rarely use the Student phase; which isn't traditional as you happen to remark. In the seventies e.v. no lineage at all was using it. I do find it useful for certain aspirants; but certainly not in your case who -- by your own word -- have studied for 10 years."
I wanted to join the Jane Wolfe lineage, which is why I was inquiring. Thanks to my inquiry, another member here of the Motto lineage replied to me, and led me to the one who accepted me. This is what I have worked for and studyined for, and practiced for my whole adult life. You know, in closing letters, we use the statement, "Fraternally," and I am estatic that this man chose to recognize my hard work, and offensive that someone here meets my claim with suspicion. That's not very Fraternal is it?"
Rightfully so (being suspicious) as the documents of the A.'.A.'. clearly state that each person will go through a Student period of 3 months. I find it silly that you post to an online forum just a couple months after being a Probationer or however long. I see no point in this as part of the whole point is that its a relatively private order in that you are supposed to communicate with your superiors. Opening up the discussion to a bunch of people who happen to log onto an internet forum doesnt seem wise to me.
IAO131
-
Now I see why you get into these discussions all over this board. I've shared all kinds of things with people on this board, in a fraternal matter. I'm not exactly sure what your problem is, but who are you to judge the way someone in the Third Order runs their lineage? That the head of Frater Motta's lineage decided to take me on as a student is nothing but an honor. My open proclamation of my being in the AA is not unwise, it is in the Oath. All I started this thread to do was to get pointers and technique suggestions for formation of the body of light, and for assistance with the Vibration of God names. Judgemental people should be run over by trucks full of cow manure. Why this attack? I'll take down the thread, if me asking these questions was offensive... I'm not going to be drawn into a conflict by ignorance
-
Just a sentence or two...
I have thought that these posts - using this forum as a public exposure of your diary and process - was a foolish idea showing bad judgment. However, since it wasn't seriously hurting anyone else, and you've been very good about confirming the context from which you're writing, I saw no reason, as administrator or moderator, to remove them or aggressively discourage them.
If there is any authenticity to your Probationer status (and I say this remembering few details and, thus far, making no judgment on it one way or the other), then I do think you're screwing yourself pretty badly. I accept that this screwing yourself pretty badly may be part of the karma and learning you need to work through as a Probationer, so I have followed my policy of not interfering with a Probationer's process.
Please take my remarks, then, not in the form of usurping your unique and distinctive relationship with your Neophyte, but as someone who knows a little about the subject answering you in a public way when you have soliticted (by your postings) public involvement.
My opinion is that this is coming from all the wrong places - from ego and need for validation and seeking some outside support where you feel you aren't getting it - or something like all that! If you get any of those results, then you're really screwing yourself. The Probationer is intentionally left to flounder, and is intentionally left cut off (unless he or she seeks specific instruction on a matter) because this floundering and flailing, or racing and gluttony, or whatever other style is taken through the Probation period, needs to be left to work itself out.
Here is the real underlying task of the Probationer behind all the other particular details: To come from emptiness and lack of definition to find one's own distinctive way. There is no real place for many more grades - no place else in the Outer College! - where one is left so unstructured and so devoted to figuring out one's own path and way. Beginning with 1=10, the training becomes more focussed and specific, and with 2=9 it is intensely task-driven and highly directed. This is your time to flail and flounder and wonder if you're going to drown or swim, and figure out what swimming styles to use.
By bringing the process here, you are either (1) not wanting feedback, in which case it's all ego, or (2) wanting feedback, in which case you're already admitting that you aren't interested in the A.'.A.'. system, and you're undercutting your ability to benefit from this irreplicable grade stage.
But that's OK, since the probation itself eventually decides whether this system of for you.
-
I will trouble you all no futher, and I apologize for asking for advice. I understand that a Probationer, or any level of the AA is to work alone. I will figure these things out for myself. The things Jim said were probably right in some ways. I do know that my old Aeon self has alot of letting go to do.
My good friend, whose name I wont' mention, a Buddhist that runs a group in my town every Saturday morning, who is 53 years old, travelled all of the world, worked with refugee's in Burma, among many other things that I can only hope to be able to achieve, took me under his wing a few years ago, and taught me to meditate properly, and many many other things, meeting with me outside of the group, corresponding with me still to this day, and inviting me along for local charity work, and a couple of times to assist him in other college towns near bye. Those were the greatest most peaceful times of my life. He told me once that it had been quite a long time since he had met someone with my dedication and discipline, or someone who was so humble and giving.
Mr. Eschelmen, I have nothing but the utmost respect for you, as I have told you before, but please, don't try to classify me when you don't even know me. I would never do that to you, or anyone else for that matter. I do not have an ego, and I do care very much about the AA, and am both humbled and honored that after all of these years my path has led me to being a part of this.
I am truly sorry that I posted a diary entry on this site, looking for help, I did try to keep it in context, but ignorance has created tangents. I will not post questions when I am struggling, although I find it odd that others who post questions are not met with this hostility (but admittedly, they are not in danger of "screwing themselves" out of everything to gain from being a Probationer). I have edited it down the original entry, but now altogether I will, again, figure this out alone. I do not have another AA member for 100's of miles, and this board, I thought, would be a means for learning, not having access to a teacher. Frater Phoenix is probably being intentionally vague with me, because he must know the things you stated, and more than likely expects me to figure these things out alone.
If certain people on this forum chose not to recognize the Motta lineage as legitimate, or chose to question whether or not I am a Probationer, I do have my Oath, signed by David Bersson, than that's their business, as, no, I do not need vallidation.
-
@Frater Pramudita said
"I will trouble you all no futher, and I apologize for asking for advice."
It's not a matter of whether it's OK (from the forum p.o.v.) for you to ask. Rather, it's not OK for anyone to give advice to a Probationer. It negates their process. You're on your own, or with your Neophyte. That's the karma you created by being admitted by that Neophyte, and that's the process you've taken on.
"Mr. Eschelmen, I have nothing but the utmost respect for you, as I have told you before, but please, don't try to classify me when you don't even know me."
Fair enough. I admit the limits of my knowledge of you, and can only go by what I see here. My remarks were meant especially to address your visible actions here in relationship to the task you say you have accepted.
"I am truly sorry that I posted a diary entry on this site, looking for help,"
When working with a Probationer, I don't even want to see a diary entry until they are done and hand the whole thing in. I'll answer questions, provide instruction as requested, etc.; but it's too easy to take the current state of things out of context. A Probationer commonly shifts perspective on many things (himself or herself in particular) during the course of the probation, and that try-and-fail-and-succeed etc. needs to be let run its course without stepping into the middle of it.
So... don't show us your diary, just ask your questions. (If you wish.)
"I will not post questions when I am struggling, although I find it odd that others who post questions are not met with this hostility (but admittedly, they are not in danger of "screwing themselves" out of everything to gain from being a Probationer)."
Exactly! You're in a "figure some things out on your own" process. I am writing in respect of your choice and your process. Someone who has not taken on that task is in a different place.
"I do not have another AA member for 100's of miles, and this board, I thought, would be a means for learning, not having access to a teacher."
Again... feel free to ask questions when you want. Just don't frame it in terms of diary entries and the like. Treat them like, say, computer support questions: State a specific question in crisp, exacting terms, and you're likely to get crisp, exacting answers.
"Frater Phoenix is probably being intentionally vague with me, because he must know the things you stated, and more than likely expects me to figure these things out alone. "
Answers often should be no less vague than the questions. Clarifying a question often gives you the answer already!
"If certain people on this forum chose not to recognize the Motta lineage as legitimate, or chose to question whether or not I am a Probationer, I do have my Oath, signed by David Bersson, than that's their business, as, no, I do not need vallidation."
I make no comment one way or the other. The main thing here is that you are not a Probationer under me, or under anyone for whom I have responsibility, so I am barred from regarding you as a Probationer and interacting with you on that level. I can, however (and will!), interact with you as a human being with questions
-
@Frater Pramudita said
"I want to make sure that no one is misunderstanding how I feel about my Neophyte Teacher. He is exceedingly wise, and is helping me in all areas, however, and I did not state that he was inefficient. However, he has not answered some of my questions, which after having spent the day thinking about it, I can only deduct this is due to him just wanting me to figure it out for myself. "
It has been my experience with my former Neophyte that any questions I had that he at the LEAST guided me to the answer by giving me suggestions of where to look, if not outright telling me the answer to my questions.
As to another post discussing the assignation of tasks to the Probationer. Read the Oath again. It calls for the Probationer to perform tasks as given to him by the Order, iow his superior. While the superior should not require certain PRACTICES part of the tests of a Probationer are to see what his dedication to the order is through these assigned tasks be they mundane tasks like photocopying documents, proofreading manuscripts, key entering documents etc. this practical work lays the groundwork for service to the order and also teaches the candidate in subtle ways.
Now requiring tasks like doing his or her laundry, cleaning their house? It may be occasionally funny as a joke but it also doesn't serve the student, just the master and the idea isn't to serve the master but to serve the student through the assigned tasks.
-
@frateruranus said
"As to another post discussing the assignation of tasks to the Probationer. Read the Oath again. It calls for the Probationer to perform tasks as given to him by the Order, iow his superior."
No! That's exactly who it does not mean. In this regard the Probationer oath uses wording quite distindtive from the Neophyte oath in the same regard.
If I were at home, I could cite direct, well-distributed policy statements by Crowley emphasizing that the Neophyte is not authorized to do this. There are also documented cases of AC giving people hell (e.g., Fuller) for breaking this important rule.
"While the superior should not require certain PRACTICES part of the tests of a Probationer are to see what his dedication to the order is through these assigned tasks be they mundane tasks like photocopying documents, proofreading manuscripts, key entering documents etc. this practical work lays the groundwork for service to the order and also teaches the candidate in subtle ways. "
There is no place for this kind of chela abuse in the A.'.A.'. system.
Offers of service are another matter, of course. But your description sounds like the quasi-Nazi M. Motta approach which is entirely out of line.
-
The Oath of the Probationer states that the Probationer "shall perform any task the A.'. A.'. may see fit to lay upon him"; the Oath of the Neophyte states that the Neophyte "shall perform any tasks the Zelator in the name of the A.'. A.'. and by its authority may see fit to lay upon him". The meaning of these two clauses are very distinct and I believe the wording was chosen very carefully.
Indeed, the assigning of tasks to the Probationer by the Neophyte would certainly interfere in the process of "obtaining a scientific knowledge of the nature and powers of my own being". Are we to expect the Neophyte to know about the nature and powers of his/her own being? I don't think so...
The Probationer is given the entire A.'.A.'. curriculum, from Neophyte to Magus, to explore during his/her period of Probation and to keep a careful record of such. The one thing the Neophyte should not be doing during this period is suggesting tasks to the Probationer...
On the other hand, the Zelator will likely be of great assistance in helping the Neophyte address the weaknesses ( and strengths ) learned by examining the record of the Probationer.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@frateruranus said
"
"While the superior should not require certain PRACTICES part of the tests of a Probationer are to see what his dedication to the order is through these assigned tasks be they mundane tasks like photocopying documents, proofreading manuscripts, key entering documents etc. this practical work lays the groundwork for service to the order and also teaches the candidate in subtle ways. "
"There is no place for this kind of chela abuse in the A.'.A.'. system.
Offers of service are another matter, of course. But your description sounds like the quasi-Nazi M. Motta approach which is entirely out of line."
I don't see how it is abuse. Like I said, personal labour for the superior is definitely as no-no. But asking a student to typeset his diary or key enter a ritual etc. to help subtly facilitate his learning of the material? Some people, such as myself (dyslexia), find this sort of work helps us to develop a working knowledge of the materials because we have to pay closer attention. I never would have found this out were I not to have been assigned such tasks as typesetting this ritual or that ritual and to proofread this manuscript or that essay. I may be using the wrong terms to explain what I mean as well though.
And "quasi-nazi" is a bit strong don't you think? I wasn't saying tell the aspirant to do these things or they won't pass but that assignation of tasks helps to gauge the student and how best to help guide the student on the path with the most success. I think you are being a bit knee-jerk to my comment.
-
@frateruranus said
"And "quasi-nazi" is a bit strong don't you think?"
No, I don't. I knew enough people who worked directly under Motta to receive consistent reports from several people.
-
@frateruranus said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@frateruranus said
""While the superior should not require certain PRACTICES part of the tests of a Probationer are to see what his dedication to the order is through these assigned tasks be they mundane tasks like photocopying documents, proofreading manuscripts, key entering documents etc. this practical work lays the groundwork for service to the order and also teaches the candidate in subtle ways. "
There is no place for this kind of chela abuse in the A.'.A.'. system.
Offers of service are another matter, of course. But your description sounds like the quasi-Nazi M. Motta approach which is entirely out of line."
I don't see how it is abuse. Like I said, personal labour for the superior is definitely as no-no. But asking a student to typeset his diary or key enter a ritual etc. to help subtly facilitate his learning of the material? Some people, such as myself (dyslexia), find this sort of work helps us to develop a working knowledge of the materials because we have to pay closer attention. I never would have found this out were I not to have been assigned such tasks as typesetting this ritual or that ritual and to proofread this manuscript or that essay. I may be using the wrong terms to explain what I mean as well though.
And "quasi-nazi" is a bit strong don't you think? I wasn't saying tell the aspirant to do these things or they won't pass but that assignation of tasks helps to gauge the student and how best to help guide the student on the path with the most success. I think you are being a bit knee-jerk to my comment."
"Although the intentions & motives of the Nazis may be totally wrong, divorced from their actions their rigorous training, discipline, and order can still be admirable. Im not sure why that is an insult regarding organizational matters.
Either way, it wasnt intended in this way and it does seem a bit knee-jerk.
IAO131
-
The highest ranking of them also openly practiced extremes of sadism - sufficient for this to have become inherent in the meaning of the word. And "extremes of sadism" is a big part of what I meant.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"The highest ranking of them also openly practiced extremes of sadism - sufficient for this to have become inherent in the meaning of the word. And "extremes of sadism" is a big part of what I meant."
Does "of them" refer to Motta or Nazis? And how is this 'inherent in the meaning of the word" if Marquis de Sade was in the early 19th century and the term 'sadism' was used well before the Nazi party or Motta ever existed?
IAO131
-
@Aum418 said
"Does "of them" refer to Motta or Nazis?"
Nazis.
"And how is this 'inherent in the meaning of the word" if Marquis de Sade was in the early 19th century and the term 'sadism' was used well before the Nazi party or Motta ever existed?"
Inherent by usage and history. In other words, it was a primary characteristic of the Nazi regime as embodied by its inner core.
-
I knew what Jim meant but I didn't take offense to it. I respect and admire what Jim has to say and do even if I feel in this case he is being a little over reactive on the topic.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Aum418 said
"Does "of them" refer to Motta or Nazis?"Nazis.
"And how is this 'inherent in the meaning of the word" if Marquis de Sade was in the early 19th century and the term 'sadism' was used well before the Nazi party or Motta ever existed?"
Inherent by usage and history. In other words, it was a primary characteristic of the Nazi regime as embodied by its inner core."
The Nazis may have been cruel, but I'm a bit of a Sadist myself.
IAO131
-
Have you seen "Salo" by Pasolini? The connections between Sadism and Nazism are made very clear here - the film is inspired by Pasolini's first hand experiences growing up under Nazi rule.
-
Jim, you stated in reference to the Motta lineage:
"The highest ranking of them also openly practiced extremes of sadism - sufficient for this to have become inherent in the meaning of the word. And "extremes of sadism" is a big part of what I meant."
The reason I am revisting this thread, I would like to know, either here, or in an inbox email, if you are referring to David Berrson, aka Frater Sphinx aka Frater Phoenix whom Motta made the head of his lineage and O.T.O. upon his death.
I am asking because this person is the person that admitted me into the A A and is my Neophyte, but for reasons I wouldn't discuss in the open, I have reasons to seriously question my choice. I would appreciate any feedback