Lineages lineages and more lineages
-
Ivory Towers are for Adepts of the worst kind.
So... get wet and start swimming!
The water is bitter cold one moment and piss warm the next, but you will get use to it.
-
93, @Mr Mason, So you disagree with a compilation upon the various Thelemic sects, lineages, and organizations? While I agree that the search, and that leap, are "necessary", I fail to see no reason against a basic compilation of data.
-
I am more in line with the "take the plunge" opinion.
Reading a persons critique only lets you know if you will get what you want from an order or what have you. The reality I see is one where it is not about what you want, it is about something entirely different: need (adequate enough).
-
FiliusBestia, 93,
"I fail to see no reason against a basic compilation of data."
My problem is, how do you do this? Having sampled one or two, I know I would loathe some of the Christian-based Hermetic orders, which I know work wonderfully well for friends of mine. Do I say their group-mind energy is sucky, when for my friends it's the only thing worth doing?
And how do we rank them? Do we get 10 volunteers to join four orders each, then average their findings? One objection there is, you can't be in two Golden Dawn-type orders at one time: it simply isn't workable, nor acceptable to the Orders themselves. If you find one that doesn't mind double adherence, that IS one I'd put on a no-fly list.
Or, take a large order like the O.T.O. Some Lodges would be top-notch places to learn, others could be run by low-ranking people who don't know much, or might have poor people skills. And personnel tend to change, so the Lodge that got a D-minus in April is back on track by October, while our prized 'ranking' remains the same.
Then again, part of the process is a weeding out. Groups that are too soft on newbies probably have low standards all the way through, but they would perhaps rate highly because nobody pushed the lazy members out.
UnderaBloodRed Sky wanted me to supply "detailed, critical analysis of one's own personal experience." But the problem there is, what I have underdone, and undergo, is based on my own path - it would have little relationship, perhaps none, to anyone else's criteria. "Thus ye have star & star, system & system; let not one know well the other!" Things that were major life-battles for me would be irrelevant to other people, while I've seen things I skated through hold people back for years.
My final objection is this: with this list or guide-book, I think some people want a lazy or a cowardly way out. They want to know what's coming up, what unlovely ordeals might occur, and so on. The initiation process takes you through your own trip. You might need a "bad" experience to make you look at certain things you could dodge with a really charismatic teacher whose energy might too easily blind you to your own true failings and strengths.
Nobody can know what is going to happen when they commit to joining an Order. You have to let something more than your conscious, rational self make the call, or you will tend to maintain conscious rational control for too long. That's not to diss the Malkuthian gift of discrimination, which is still necessary, but it is only one tool among several.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
FiliusBestia and UABRS, if you are asking about a fraternal organization that has meetings, maybe you can attend some open meetings or talks and ask questions. If you are asking about the A.'.A.'. then as I said, there is some information here, and some of the lineages have websites which may reflect the tone of that line. FiliuBestia since you are a Probationer you can ask your Superior anything and expect an intelligent answer.
Edward, I agree with you that for anyone to compile a listing as was suggested, is impossible. Someone brought up the example of Christian churches which branched out over the centuries. How could any one person do a compilation of data on all branches of that or any other religion? Also, over the years, organizations will change and any information you may find could be out of date. So, any spiritual Order or organization cannot be compared to say, a list of universities which can be ranked according to their academic standing, professors and social life.
But as far as I can see, there is no secrecy. -
93,
Perhaps a list of suggestions on what to look for in an order or lineage, rather than a rated list of organizations might help.
-
Money: How much do they want, and why? Renting a decent ritual space isn't cheap, and can easily cost $200 or $300 a month. Sure, they might have a member with a huge basement, or on who has a large loft. But if they don't, they need most of your dues to cover a monthly (or whenever) rental.
-
Interviews: Is there an interview first, or do they just say "C'mon down on Saturday night" ? The Freemasons and any order I know of do preliminary interviews. It sorts out the people who were told by their Spirit Guides from Arcturus to "apply for initiation because they say your Order of the Purple Haze is concealing the UFO that will take us all back home." And it provides a chance for an applicant to ask questions. Some questions can't be answered, but there should be an explanation of why not. How do the interviewers seem? Cagey? More interested in your body than your mind? Concerned about "possible future problems with your limited cashflow?" Or concerned about making sure their fraternity's standards are maintained?
-
Standards: Are members required to attend regularly, or is it all easy come, easy go? If attendance is mandatory, newcomers will have more chance to interact with experienced people, and simply to listen in on the after-ritual conversations.
-
Booze 'n drugs 'n that stuff: A touchy subject in some Thelemic circles, but a lot of people drawn to the mysteries are dealing with their lives through various kinds of dependency. The aim should be reducing dependency (as opposed to joyous indulgence or serious exploration), not increasing it, or thou art not athlete for any fight.
A friend of mine told me about being invited to a Gnostic Mass, where, unsurprisingly, there were several bottles of wine on hand. But two were consumed by the officers before the rite began - she wasn't impressed. Rituals have their own buzz, which is often quite subtle, and while you might feel just a toke or a quick hit enhances *your *experience, it will almost certainly detract from that of the group.
-
Getting out: It's a perfectly legitimate question to ask at an interview, "What if I decide this isn't for me?" The reply should be something along the lines of, "Put your resignation in writing, return our rituals and papers to us, since they're ours, not yours to keep, and go have a nice life." If the response is along the lines of, "Why would you need to know that? Aren't you serious about this?" then you might want to avoid replying to their follow-up emails or phone-calls.
-
Workloads: Any decent order wants people to *experience *the teachings, not just read or memorize them. That means devoting a certain amount of time per day/week/month to the curriculum. You should be offered some advice on how much time is required, and any material outlay on your part (for art materials, acquiring a robe or regalia, etc.).
-
Allegiance and the Oath: An initiation Oath should cover a commitment to the Highest, and not require you to offer your soul to the leadership. The published Stella Matutina Oath (in Regardie's The Golden Dawn), for example, requires the aspirant to make no commitment that a serious solitary practitioner would not already have made, other than to guard the privacy of other members, and not reveal their membership outside of the gatherings.
Anyone else with experience have things to add to this list?
93 93/93,
Edward
-
-
Perhaps the level of mentoring allowed? Some orders facilitate mentorship while others don't allow it.
I'm throwing out something that was once an issue for me, but I'm not really sure how to present the idea because I'm only contrasting three orders in my head, and I don't have a lot of wisdom on the topic.
-
Frater LR, 93,
Good point. An applicant should at least know what resources are available for guidance.
Maybe a Point 8 would be:
List of questions: Make such a list, and don't be embarrassed to refer to it during an interview.
There are few things worse than an applicant who clams up, and/or forgets what he or she was anxious about on the way to the interview. It makes it harder for the interviewers to know where the person is at, if the discussion dwindles to "Umm..."
93 93/93,
Edward
-
93, @Universe, That is perfectly within your rights. I sit more in the middle ground, feeling that a minimum of info could be useful-it would still involve that plunge.
-
@Mason, I agree with the heart of your argument, but feel a chunk is irrelevant if the info is applied properly in writing. Write the facts, let others form their own opinions. Rank them? Write of inside ordeals and such? NO! I think you mistake my core intention.I think your numbered ideas are a good start though. My thoughts are not to peddle specific orders, or to reveal their "secrets" or trials. More like a book of info and tips for those searching.
-
FiliusBestia, 93,
"My thoughts are not to peddle specific orders, or to reveal their "secrets" or trials. More like a book of info and tips for those searching.
"The difficulty I'm having here is knowing at what level(s) to pitch this. For example, you still get interested people asking us if Thelema is Satanic or a form of demon-worship, since they've not discovered much of the core literature. There are others who are more into it, but are looking to clarify difficult passages of the Book of the Law; and others interested in much deeper aspects of Qabalistic psychology and yogic practices.
It all works a lot easier if we come in with questions based on our own areas of personal anxiety of confusion. In my experience, those key questions often sit on a mother lode of underlying ideas and assumptions. Once the knots in that begin to unravel, then the energy for exploring and expressing the True Will ceases to be held back so much.
I think what I'm trying to say here is: we don't need information so much as we need to establish the foundations of a personal understanding. At that point, part of the mystery begins to come clear for us, and rather than needing to know what goes on in the orders, we know better what we ourselves need to go and do. That's the best possible protection against a negative situation developing, because if things don't gel with our own aspiration, we are going to go and look elsewhere.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
What I would want to add is that if anyone bothers to look, there is information on every Thelemic organization that I know of out there. Going onto a forum (any of them, this isn't the only one that I've seen questions of the nature come up) and soliciting for information and crying about not getting a good response only reflects back on your true desire/pull to join a Thelemic organization. There really is plenty of information in the various books/journals/websites out there to give people at least half a clue about the various groups. Just do the work/research - it's out there.
-
93 Mr. Mason, I agree. I wonder just how much to involve in it, not to mention the part of personal questions. Too, though, I would think a good chunk of those questions overlap in just what they are asking for. I also think that a book would be useful for dispelling some of the myths of Thelema. I, too, hear far too often the question or atatement on Thelema/Satanism.
Kuniggety, I agree. I did my research before joining what I did, though I still feel as if there is plenty of info that I missed... I think there's more than I found. Let's not forget that not everyone has very good internet access. The things you can find on a cell phone web, and those you can find on a desktop pop up a bit different. Some people just don't know where to start, others just end up with more questions in their searching. Of course, that also comes down to the leap. -
FB 93,
"I also think that a book would be useful for dispelling some of the myths of Thelema. I, too, hear far too often the question or atatement on Thelema/Satanism.
"That book has been written several times, by several writers - Rodney Orpheus and Lon Milo Duquette spring to mind. If we get bothered about what other people think and believe, we'll get nowhere. Their Wills (or reactive patterns built up, over and around those Wills) aren't the issue - only our own Wills count. "Do that, and no other shall say nay." (Liber L, I, 43).
At the end of the day, you could be sitting there with acceptance and intelligent comprehension from your friends and family, in possession of an encyclopedic grasp of the Thelemic Qabalistic systems of the different orders, and their practical curricula, and ... nothing would happen until you made a move.
"If Will stops and asks why, invoking Because, then Will stops & does naught." (II, 30).
93 93/93,
Edward
-
93 Mr. Mason,
true on all the above. Once again, it comes to that leap. I still stand that a book, as such as we were originally talking about could be of use, but I also feel that it's... angagement?... is a touchy subject as well. I by no means feel that we should be handing out free rides. The thought of compiled is one that naturally appeals to my type. That is what I do, it is who I am.
"That book has been written several times, by several writers - Rodney Orpheus and Lon Milo Duquette spring to mind."
So i wonder why it is there remains so much misconception. Perhaps the wrong writing styles? Wrong authors appealing to the wrong people? It does not so much bother me peronally. I'm on those people who seeks out info, compiles it, seeks to understand it and pass it on to others. Like I said, it's my nature. That annoys me. I feel, to use Crowley's metaphor, the wrong magickal implements have been used in the wrong form, and are thus not getting the results that are intended. Even Thelemites run around claiming to worship the Dark Lord, and other sensationalist things. Others views not mattering aside, misinformation is as great an enemy as secrecy.
Just some thoughts flitting through this little head of mine. -
FiliusBestia, 93,
"So i wonder why it is there remains so much misconception. Perhaps the wrong writing styles?"
How about looking at the people who see these things in Thelema? If people persist in seeing darkness, it's not very much good explaining they're wrong. They feel empowered or somehow righteous by holding the views they do. This is the folk folly - we have to let it be, and stick to our Thelemic knitting. It will change when it changes.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
93 Mr. mason,
In a way I agree. At the same time I don't. That's where i agree to disagree, because it comes down to personal opinion. Perhaps I'm just not experienced enough, and haven't hit enough walls. I'm a stubborn ass anyways. Lol. -
To get back to the OP's question... there really aren't any lineages of the A.'.A.'. for the order is one and every member can trace their line back to Crowley, the head of the Order. Even according to the Book of the Law he is the sole authority on Thelema and the A.'.A.'. As such though there are several broken links in the chain.
Crowley's reference to charlatans in One Star in Sight was in reference to the then recently expelled C.F. Russell who went on to found the Great Brotherhood of God, aka the Choronzon Club, wherein he claimed to be presenting a short cut to initiation. Whether Russell was a charlatan as a magician is not the issue, Crowley was under the belief that Russell was still presenting himself as a representative of the A.'.A.'. and that was the issue.
The broken links I refer to are people who were expelled by Crowley but continued the work or people who were lost in the shuffle when their superior had resigned/been expelled etc. Another factor in this "broken chain" affair is that in a lot of cases most members of the A.'.A.'. never officially passed beyond Probationer, let alone Neophyte or Zelator. In this I am referring to those who held onto the flame of the order following Crowley's death and the disorganization that occurred in the following years under Karl Germer. He was just as lax in his running of the A.'.A.'. as he was the OTO. Even Germer's primary student never technically passed beyond Neophyte, but claimed the Zelator grade shortly before Germer's death. I think the only initiation Germer mentioned outright was Phyllis Seckler's 5=6 status and then that was a reference to being under her HGA's guidance.
So the various "lineages" exist because of the fracturing of the order under leadership that was not ready, nor willing, to bear that responsibility. It was a time where dormancy was probably best as well, cultivating a small group that would bear greater fruit in the next generation when the world might be ready. Germer I think did what was necessary with what he was given.
There are several people out there with legitimate links to the A.'.A.'. in the sense of they signed Oaths & Tasks under people who signed Oaths & Tasks that go back to Crowley but the authority of the A.'.A.'. itself as a formal organization? As a working hierarchy with a direct link to the Secret Chiefs of the order? Well, that is debateable. I have my own opinion on that issue but I tend to keep it to myself. I know who I feel is the head of the Order on the material plane based on what I have seen & read.