Doubts about initiation. Suggestions, please :?
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Using the word "fraternity," I might agree. Had you said "genuinely contacted Order," I'd disagree much. It can provide far more than you apparently can even dream of."
I wasn't trying to denigrate any Order of Thelema. In fact, I have nothing but good things to say about you guys. But the fact stands: intitiation is not dependent on, nor will it ever be dependent on membership to one order or another. For one, mundane initiation is a proper and necessary step. Others appeal directly to the source, the fountainhead of all Light, Love and Power.
All according to one's Will.
"That is totally silly. It may be true of a rare person here and there, but, in general, you might as well say that copulation occurs long before losing one's virginity - your statement is that absurd. Initiation is not just a formality. Initiation into a contacted, live extrusion of the Inner Order provides a life-altering linkage that generally inaugurates - initiates! - the most important journey one can and will ever take in life."
Perhaps it is silly of you to assume who is rare and who isn't.
Some people need no middleman: they have an intimate and tangible link with the divine.
Again, I mean no disrespect to any Order or School or System. But it is not everyone's Will to be initiated in that way. There are many here who are members of no Order, students of no School, and yet they have as tangible a lnk to the Source of Life as any "Initiate." Not everybody, sure, but sometimes the Powers that Be take an aspirant's training into their own hands.
-
93
"JPF wrote:
But it is not everyone's Will to be initiated in that way. There are many here who are members of no Order, students of no School, and yet they have as tangible a lnk to the Source of Life as any "Initiate." Not everybody, sure, but sometimes the Powers that Be take an aspirant's training into their own hands."Surely, though, the two combine? Even the most exalted tulkus in the Tibetan traditions - and I do include the Dalai Lama, the Panchen Lama and the other top-ranked bodhisattvas - are put through the empowerments. The Sixth Dalai Lama, who was not formally recognized until his teens, had become a very non-priestly person by the time he was discovered. He is still recognized as a valid Incarnation of Chrenrezig, but his career wasvery non-standard.
It's simply assumed by the Tibetan authorities that *anybody *needs guidance and correction. The Dalai Lama has always had his own teachers, for example. This thread seems to assume that a teacher in Thelema is an Indian-(or other Asian) style guru, to whom you might offer worship and unquestioning obedience. Teachers in our tradition are guides, and in the early stages they take you into and through Malkuth, which teaches the virtue of Discrimination, not slavery.
A person working on his or her own can make great progress, but is still closed to fresh info and fresh perspectives that could both accelerate progress, and broaden understanding.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
Alrah, 93,
I wouldn't say Crowley got an 'open house' reception' from most people. He knew he needed training, and looked for it almost frantically in the late 1890s.
And he had training at key junctures - from the G.D. and Mathers initially, then Allan Bennett, then (extremely important for dhyana) Oscar Eckenstein. The yoga training Ceylon followed. He was an apt pupil, but he never shunned nor disparaged the need for initiation and training. You should also note (I'm taking both Regardie's and Kenneth Grant's remarks into account here) that often, he withheld direct instruction. He *wanted *students to seek on their own.
I'll place a small land-mine in this discussion, by saying I don't think it's actually about initiation and teachers. Rather, it's about the fear of finding yourself once again stuck with a bad parent. Reprising childhood is, for many people, a terror worse than anything the adult world can offer.
Similarly, teachers - any of them - take on a parent projection, and they need to have been through the mill themselves to handle this. So the first question anyone should ask someone who might become a teacher or instructor is on the lines of : "Can you tell me if you ever made a total fool of yourself in your own training?" The answer to that should tell you whether to proceed or not.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
@Alrah said
"but I also see naff teachers who shun engagement through fear and just adopt an overly authoritarian attitude and see thier students failings as a reflection of thier own attachment to being 'a good teacher' and reject them (and from the students perspective - again)."
We would be an agreement that this is crap.
I would add, though, that many people need a serious "ordeal of discrimination," and there are few things that give this so thoroughly as picking a bad teacher!
-
Alrah, 93,
"Well - if they (the teacher) doesn't back off from the mess when the student is flailing around and all sorts of infantile shite is surfacing from the loss of autonomy and the regression - then Ok. Things can be learnt for those students that need to be regressed and parential issues addressed. I think some people think teaching isn't about getting involved and engaged in that area of a students psychology and most aren't prepared for it. I see people who have a proper engagement and then a proper seperation from thier teacher and it's good for people, but I also see naff teachers who shun engagement through fear and just adopt an overly authoritarian attitude and see thier students failings as a reflection of thier own attachment to being 'a good teacher' and reject them (and from the students perspective - again). So yeah - a teacher who can be completely honest about their own failings in the past and take the ego 'lightly' - is something worth testing. "
Such a perfect teacher would be very safe and is, I imagine, a very, very rare find.
A properly run mystery school uses the type of graduated system you tend to disparage. People come in as new initiates, stumble and fumble, make some progress, get stuck, misunderstand, misconstrue, get a realization and move on a bit, get stuck again, and so on ... but they still grow through persistence.
Just like they would in regular real life 'out there', but working under intense, self-critical scrutiny. Mystery schools are not New Age-style escape pods.
Anybody who survives six or eight years of this might be a sadomasochistic flake, but it's far more likely that that individual will have become wise enough to know his/her limitations. Not necessarily someone who "can be completely honest about their own failings in the past and take the ego 'lightly'," but someone who can take a deep breath when things are getting iffy, and ask a few pertinent questions of him/herself as well as of the student.93 93/93,
Edward
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@JPF said
"Had you said "genuinely contacted Order," I'd disagree much."
"How do you know if an order has been genuinely contacted?
-
@gmugmble said
"How do you know if an order has been genuinely contacted?"
Excellent question. And I think the answer is that there is no absolute test, no retina scan or fingerprinting. You have to trust your intuition and common sense to guide you. (Which means that the decision is already part of the training.)
The standard guideline to prime your common sense and intuition is: By their works ye shall know them.
-
@Alrah said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Alrah said
"Or they can preordained."I'm not talking about the four or five on the planet at any given time who are in that Dali Lama like category. I'm talking about most people."
Dalai Lama bosh! ...."
Are you saying that The Dalai Lama is not any more wise or spiritually advanced than 4 or 5 thousand others, who are keeping a low profile? Just want to understand. And you feel that he is not the incarnation of anyone, that he was taught his lineage's wisdon by others? Then he too belonged to a mystery school or tradition.
I am wondering how you arrived at your conclusion that some people are preordained? Just want to understand your POV.
-
@Edward Mason said
"Surely, though, the two combine? "
Absolutely. As I've said, the Systems of Thelema are the best and most perfected forms of initiation currently on the planet. But it's stupid to think that they're the only forms of initiation.
"I would add, though, that many people need a serious "ordeal of discrimination," and there are few things that give this so thoroughly as picking a bad teacher! "
Yes. i began my spiritual quest under the guidance of a deluded, perverted swine. Naive and ignorant, I allowed myself to be fooled by his seeming "wisdom." In the end, it turned out that his only aim was to take advantage of me sexually, an aim he accomplished.
A hard lesson, yes--but the best lessons are always the hardest.
I went through a lot of such "mentors," becoming increasingly disillusioned each time. After a while I decided it was best to take my training into my own hands. A difficult path, yes, but it garnered a sense of independence and strength that would be hard to develop in a more traditional system.
"I'll place a small land-mine in this discussion, by saying I don't think it's actually about initiation and teachers. Rather, it's about the fear of finding yourself once again stuck with a bad parent. Reprising childhood is, for many people, a terror worse than anything the adult world can offer. "
Interesting point. And that is exactly why I tend towards Thelemic systems above any other. There is very little of the charlatanism/power-lust I despise. I've always been treated with the utmost respect--and I've never been pressured! That is a sure sign of a true system of attainment: an utmost respect for each and every aspirant, and a lack of desire to fool people into attendence.
-
@AvshalomBinyamin said
"Did you have teachers that helped you get in contact with your HGA, or did you do it alone?"
Dude, just listen to your self, your inner voice. Just listen-and feel.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I continue to chuckle that so many are speaking of the end as if it's the beginning.
Every joke has its punchline; but it isn't very effective without the right setup.
"What does that mean? I can't have a genuine spiritual experience because I haven't done steps A, B, or C in somebody's curriculum? Get real. Schools, programs, and curriculi are there to help, not hinder.
-
I have some additional theories on this topic: I do not think so-called initiatory schools actually initiate, either now or ever; only life Herself and/or the HGA does this. They do teach initiation, through lectures, rituals, dramatic rites, drama etc. but the purpose was not ever to actually initiate, but to program the subconscious mind with markers so that the "initiate" or seeker would have markers to assist him or her with navigation and to order and make sense of one's life and spiritual experience because one stage cannot really be fully engaged until the previous one is digested. And so having a map is critical for this process, and therefor so-called initiation is important. Also, during these rituals, being composite in nature, there are very real changes, energies and vibrations going on and are important in their own right, but not to be confused with true initiation, which is something different entirely.
The other major role of the schools is to preserve and to teach the occult arts and sciences and philosophy; and to train the mind and body in meditation.
Looking back on recent history, the major intitiators have been the rebel artists, poets, scientists, musicians, actors hell-raisers etc. who seduced and shocked the masses with sex, drugs, and rock & roll (or some variant thereof).
-
93,
Underabloodredsky wrote:"I do not think so-called initiatory schools actually initiate, either now or ever; only life Herself and/or the HGA does this. "
In one sense yes, you are absolutely correct. But as people use (to quote your list) lectures, rituals, dramatic rites, drama as well as sex, drugs, and rock & roll in order to change themselves, so do people use the ceremony of initiation to open themselves to energy that is simply inaccessible without the triggering links that are created in and by that ceremony. And if the candidate isn't ready, initiation doesn't really take, not in any obvious or conscious way.
But this is way more than a clean, simple digestion of one phase of life and engagement in another. I don't know your own history, but I've been through several "start-up ceremonies." There is a difference between a friendly get together with some well-chosen words and a bit of ritual mummery ... and something that, in the next few days, opens a window that you didn't even know existed before. If you''ve not experienced the latter, then you've lost out on something rare and valuable.
I want to reiterate that I believe all the nay-saying about initiation stems from fear of being made helpless like a small child. Either people are equating the initiator or initiating group with a stern parent, or they're viewing the process as a subtler form of experiencing that situation; in effect, a kind of demonic possession.
"If they initiate you, their Group Spirit grabs you, and then you can't get out of their cult," is the implied statement. Which is just what a bad family or school situation can feel like.
But do ask first - if I don't like the Order, under what terms can I quit? You'll find any serious fraternity has rules and regs to cover that, which bind its own leadership, not just the members. If they waffle about how and when you can resign, then they're not what you want.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
The more I think about it, particularly the ancient Greek & Eqyptian orgiastic mystery rites, probably was a genuine initiatory experience.
I see your point about the "in the next few days, opens a window that you didn't even know existed before" and I think that is quite valid. However, I am not sure what the cause of that is, whether it is from other parts of the ceremony, just having other people with focused and trained wills exerting their thoughts on the candidate, thereby causing change to occur in the astral or mental bodies.
As I said, this is something I am currently pondering, .i.e. what is initiation really. The point I want to emphasise in this thread however, is that the individual is solely responsible and capable for one's own spiritual development and that everything else is secondary. It is not an either/or scenario either. Some people seem to think I am advocating a solitary vs. fraternal system, and I am not saying that at all. It is just very dangerous to start believing that attainment to the highest can only be bestowed from without, or you have to following this particular system over that one etc. ad nauseum.
-
93,
"The point I want to emphasise in this thread however, is that the individual is solely responsible and capable for one's own spiritual development and that everything else is secondary. "
That's where we differ. For me, spiritual development is something for which I'm responsible in the sense of fixing and cleaning the house for it to be ready for the Guest to arrive (actually, the Owner). But I need help from That to which I aspire.
"It is not an either/or scenario either. Some people seem to think I am advocating a solitary vs. fraternal system, and I am not saying that at all. "
Acknowledged.
"It is just very dangerous to start believing that attainment to the highest can only be bestowed from without, or you have to following this particular system over that one etc. ad nauseum."
I agree on there being no exclusive systems - "thus ye have star and star, system and system," etc. But I don't think anyone has ever suggested that attainment to the highest is conferred through initiation or ceremony. Attainment to the Highest - or even just the "Pretty High Up, All Considered" - is the end-result of the study, effort and meditation that follow initiation. Every initiate has the capability of delaying, screwing up, or just finding other things to do with his/her time.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
@nderabloodredsky said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"I continue to chuckle that so many are speaking of the end as if it's the beginning.Every joke has its punchline; but it isn't very effective without the right setup.
"What does that mean? I can't have a genuine spiritual experience because I haven't done steps A, B, or C in somebody's curriculum?"
There are different ways to set up a joke. I wasn't saying there is only a single way to deliver the punchline.
But this discussion kept returning to the idea that you can start at the end. You can't. Your path may be distinctive, but it is a path, a progressive growth.
Let's also please distinguish between "having a genuine spiritual expierience" and stabilizing in the state where it is the norm. Most people have all sorts of flashes and previews and sips along the way. They're important. They're foreshadowing, teasers, motivation to continue etc. But the ad for the movie shouldn't be confused with the movie.
-
@nderabloodredsky said
"As I said, this is something I am currently pondering, .i.e. what is initiation really."
In pondering it, consider that the term isn't used the same way by everyone. For example, Masons call their ceremonies "iniitiations." Some other groups call every ceremony at every degree "initiations." (Temple of Thelema has three initiations - at 0°, 5°, and 8° - and the other degrees are called something else. So don't get tripped on semantics.) In founding Aspirants to Light, we were careful never to use the term "initiate" at any point, because its degrees (like those of Freemasonry) are all at a level prior to the point that we feel the first initiation occurs.
Please remember that the word "initiate" is used in the Mysteries as it is used in a dictionary: It means a start. It doesn't mean the final result. Those who are sometimes called "great initiates" should, rather, usually be called "great initiators." An initiation is an inauguration - a start - a beginniing.
"The point I want to emphasise in this thread however, is that the individual is solely responsible and capable for one's own spiritual development and that everything else is secondary. It is not an either/or scenario either. Some people seem to think I am advocating a solitary vs. fraternal system, and I am not saying that at all. It is just very dangerous to start believing that attainment to the highest can only be bestowed from without, or you have to following this particular system over that one etc. ad nauseum."
I completely agree that the conclusion is an individual step. I'm just not at all convinced that much of anybody in this world can get the start on their own.
-
wow how i have argued this before with other people, fun but touchy subject.
I have a few friends in the pagan community that are just against anything organized, from a belief that you should be the one with the machete wacking the weeds to clear your own path, not following one already wacked.
with that being said, its a good start to get your own self independence up and what not, but it is hard to dig yourself out of your own grave, and takes the strongest willed people with clarity to do it, and takes a bit longer.The bad part of taking it in your hands is that alot of people will "stop" at a cirtain point, for example, not completing the great work in this life, and what i mean by that is i have met many people, family and friends who have like a hovering concrete slap over there aura that limits them rising to the next level of their spiritual evolution, and as most people like to use the excuse we are just human, ile find it on my own time and all that good stuff. people without organizations or good teachers fall to the prey of being comfortable at a certain level.
but, if you truly want to get somewhere, get a teacher. and i think it all truly depends on how far you are willilng to go and rip apart your barriers to hopefully come out alive and fully functional, which is what a good teacher or mystic school is for, to help you and guide you to pick up your own pieces at each evolutionary stage, so you have a better chance at getting somewhere and "attaining this so called end result".
and i have met lots of people who get caught up in fluffy communities, getting wrong ideas, creating bigger concrete slabs on their heads, where honestly most people do not even get up to being the equivalent of a neophyte in the AA, because they may stick with a formal systems, but do not receive formal training, more concrete slabs everywhere. invest in a hammer
P.S. i dont know everything, i know alot from experience and no im not past neophyte stage, just been around long enough to see what stops people.
-
@nderabloodredsky said
"As I said, this is something I am currently pondering, .i.e. what is initiation really. "
Here's a story that helped my understanding:
In order to explain this idea the faqirs and dervishes have told a story. A lion roaming through the desert found a little lion cub playing with the sheep. It so happened that the little lion had been reared with the sheep, and so had never had a chance or an occasion to realize what he was. The lion was greatly surprised to see a young lion cub running away with the same fear of the lion as the sheep. He jumped in among the flock of sheep and roared: 'Halt, halt!', but the sheep ran on, and the little lion ran also. The lion pursued only the cub, not the sheep, and said: 'Wait, I wish to speak to you'. The cub answered: 'I tremble, I fear, I cannot stand before you'. 'Why are you running about with the sheep? You are a little lion yourself!' 'No, I am a sheep. I tremble, I am afraid of you. Let me go. Let me go with the sheep!' 'Come along', said the lion, 'come with me. I will take you and I will show you what you are before I let you go'. Trembling and yet helpless, the lion cub followed the lion to a pool of water. There the lion said: 'Look at me, and look at yourself. Are we not closer, are we not near? You are not like the sheep, you are like me'.
In this story the roaming lion is the 'initiator'.
-
@skytoucher said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"As I said, this is something I am currently pondering, .i.e. what is initiation really. "Here's a story that helped my understanding:
In order to explain this idea the faqirs and dervishes have told a story. A lion roaming through the desert found a little lion cub playing with the sheep. It so happened that the little lion had been reared with the sheep, and so had never had a chance or an occasion to realize what he was. The lion was greatly surprised to see a young lion cub running away with the same fear of the lion as the sheep. He jumped in among the flock of sheep and roared: 'Halt, halt!', but the sheep ran on, and the little lion ran also. The lion pursued only the cub, not the sheep, and said: 'Wait, I wish to speak to you'. The cub answered: 'I tremble, I fear, I cannot stand before you'. 'Why are you running about with the sheep? You are a little lion yourself!' 'No, I am a sheep. I tremble, I am afraid of you. Let me go. Let me go with the sheep!' 'Come along', said the lion, 'come with me. I will take you and I will show you what you are before I let you go'. Trembling and yet helpless, the lion cub followed the lion to a pool of water. There the lion said: 'Look at me, and look at yourself. Are we not closer, are we not near? You are not like the sheep, you are like me'.
In this story the roaming lion is the 'initiator'."
So, what would we call a wolf in sheep's clothing?
