Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna A.'.A.'. attributions
-
@Sl said
"I came today by the Holy Season meditations to Atu VII and remember that Gunther put the Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna practice in this chapter of his book "The Angel & the Abyss". Now, I don´t know if he put it there "archetypically" or "simbollycally" or something (some other things in his work could possibly indicate that it´s not the case, but well), but despite that this practice could be apparently atributed to the Abyss (by the ego shutting), it´s not much better atributed to the shutting down of Yetzirah and the coming into Briah/Tiphareth K&C, as a practice specifically atributed to the Practicus by Crowley and others (Jim among others in his "M&M system")?? Or there´s something I could be missing? Could this practice be somehow considered, too, for an upper level (the Abyss crossing)?"
I wouldn't worry about the Abyss. Just think of it as a next step thing. Note that the Buddha said that Mahasatipatthana was a practice capable of taking you "all the way" (so to speak), and IIRC AC endorses that in the essay on marijuana, where he talks about the "levels" of the practice. So it will have a "level" (of revelation, of success) appropriate to your level if you practice it. (In a way all the practices are Mahasatipatthana, or maybe you could say that Mahasatipatthana was the Buddha's version of a concise encapsulation of the essence of all the practices - obviously so since it applies to everything you do.)
-
@gurugeorge said
"
I wouldn't worry about the Abyss. Just think of it as a next step thing. Note that the Buddha said that Mahasatipatthana was a practice capable of taking you "all the way" (so to speak), and IIRC AC endorses that in the essay on marijuana, where he talks about the "levels" of the practice. So it will have a "level" (of revelation, of success) appropriate to your level if you practice it. (In a way all the practices are Mahasatipatthana, or maybe you could say that Mahasatipatthana was the Buddha's version of a concise encapsulation of the essence of all the practices - obviously so since it applies to everything you do.)"Well, it makes sense since after all that´s part of the work in the second triad of adapting the work done in the first triad to the "new mind" after K&C ,etc. But I think that, as an specific practice, the Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna it´s better placed in a specific place in the whole system, and in that sense I´m inclined to think that is the Philosophus grade work, etc. Even more, in case that Gunther is making here some sort of symbolic use of this practice for explaining the Abyss thing in that context, I think it could be pretty confusing for the aspirant, who needs more concretion, at least in the practice aspects. Apart there´s those other things in his work that confuse me even more about his use or conception of the symbolism, like that of the LVX-NOX arrangement, things that makes me wonder in cases like the present what are he specifically refering to (despite the BIG reverence I have for his work).
-
Oh, sure, it's such a universal practice that it certainly has applications. No reason for you not to think of it in terms of that Path and that phase of the process.
Except, it isn't assigned there in the formal A.'.A.'. system. That doesn't mean it isn't useful - just that it isn't an explicit practice given to everyone. In 4=7 (in contrast), it is a specific practice that all have to undertake.
It doesn't stop being useful. In theory, it's even applicable to 10=1. (As Guru said above, it's a quintessential practice.)
-
Great, I was thinking that the Path of Nun attribution of this practice could be a big point for it´s other attribution to the Abyss crossing/Path of Cheth. That leads me to get that 10=1 application of this practice to the Neophyte by it´s "Osirian thing" and Path of Tau, I suppose.
I edited my last messages correcting the attribution to the grades: I said Practicus, being Philosophus.
-
@Sl said
"That leads me to get that 10=1 application of this practice to the Neophyte by it´s "Osirian thing" and Path of Tau, I suppose."
I didn't say 1=10, notice. (You copied correctly what I wrote.) I wrote 10=1, Ipsissimus.
-
Ops... But in this case that could be related to Nun again? I remember the words of Crowley about his Ipsissimus initiation putting it as some sort of "death" (in his "Confessions" I think), similarly as it´s commonly said about the Abyss crossing. What could be said it´s the difference between those two kinds of "deaths", btw?
-
Don't get stuck on structure, e.g., keeping it attached to Nun. I was just alluding to the fact that it's a practice of shedding skandas.
-
Forget that of the "deaths", silly question. Returning to topic, I´ll try to re-formulate it again after what has been said (thanks guys it´s really helpful): So having that this practice is based on avoiding identification with the contents of the mind (thus going forward to a subtler or upper plane), it could be done by anyone no matter it´s grade, so a Philosophus will do it trascending Yetzirah in the same way an Adeptus Exemptus will do it trascending Briah or an Ipsissimus even trascending Atziluth (taking the last grade of each Order by it´s character of frontier with the next). That is, each person will do it according to the subtlety of their spiritual perception and their deeper penetration through the mind... Does that sounds correct?
-
Well... sorta kinda. Sure, on the parts that probably matter to you most. I could nit-pick the language quite a lot(and some of the concepts) but - hoping I don't make this confusing for other readers who are not you - I think the answer is yes, for what it sounds like it's most important to you to believe.
My one extra caveat is that you're knee-deep in theory here, and there's always danger in that kind of tall grass.
-
Thanks for clarification. You are right, I´m usually of the cerebral type, though I try my learning to be of an organic type, basing my comprehension of esoteric concepts and of the system on the few experiencies I´ve had with Briah, (the most important, probably a direct “Vision of the Angel” a year ago in a purely abstract way, meditating). Even the concepts beyond the Abyss I try to figure them by my little comprehension of Briah... I mean I try to adjust it to the real thing, despite my more usual derives and mistakes.
-
BTW, "Vision of Angel" is generally a Yetziratic phenomenon (depending, of course, on what you mean
) . -
I don´t know, Gunther´s description of it as a sort of non-direct experience (more of a process) also doesn´t fit with that in particular. But on the other hand I´ve read descriptions of the Visions of other people and more commonly I have been able to recognize them as the same thing as mine, despite it´s more common widely difference regarding type (some visuals, some auditive, some in some sort of scene thing; mine was purely abstract).
-
@Sl said
"I don´t know, Gunther´s description of it as a sort of non-direct experience (more of a process) also doesn´t fit with that in particular. But on the other hand I´ve read descriptions of the Visions of other people and more commonly I have been able to recognize them as the same thing as mine, despite it´s more common widely difference regarding type (some visuals, some auditive, some in some sort of scene thing; mine was purely abstract)."
Even when the experience has more / deeper layers, any non-physical vision at all is inherently Yetziratic for the simple reason that there are no images in B'riyah.
-
So to clarify, having that I explained myself awfully and my poor english didn´t help: by my “abstract experience” I was referring to that, to the absence of images and thought forms, etc. Also, forget about that poem...
Briefly, the so called “vision” happened following an intense period of Yoga practices including meditation simply “killing the mind” or des-identifying me with it (some sort of Mahāsatipaṭṭhāna in fact), and fixing upon a point in my mind I came to identify by practice with Adonai or the Angel, etc. One day, simply for no apparent reason, I came much further than the habitual and found more “nothingness” of mind; then I “felt” some kind of “presence” in the exact point where the seeds of thought were emerging (I have compared it to the stretching of the neck of a bottle, to the extreme point), like if that presence were ordering them or I don´t know. Then came the notion of that and the weird feeling of ”otherness” just made me awake from that point and the thing stopped. It was in fact very quick.
Now to clarify, by then I was no newbie to meditation to not know the difference between “think that you are not thinking”, and actually doing it. After the experience I came to think of it as Briah by that lack of thought forms, and to the “Visión of Adonai” by that “otherness”, and well, came to think that the K&C must imply in some way to “penetrate” that point and go further, making an actual “Knowledge and Conversation” with that “other” thing. Also, as I said in previous posts, I came to read experiences of other people and, despite the fact that theirs generally imply mental visions, or that came by audition, of in some sort of scene, I was able to recognize the same elements of mine, of which that “otherness” was probably the principal.
After that I have had a few related experiencies but not exactly like that, so that´s all basically. Please move this part of the thread if it´s better placed in other thread or something.
-
@Sl said
"Then came the notion of that and the weird feeling of ”otherness” just made me awake from that point and the thing stopped. It was in fact very quick."
How did that "feeling of 'otherness'" present itself? In dharana there is still thought, but it is completely ignored in deference to the object of meditation. Dhyana is when even that thought is no longer perceived and there is just you and the object of meditation. Samadhi is when that Object of meditation becomes "you," becomes the Subject, and all the names and forms vanish from that and show themselves as a Uniformity. Nirvikalpa samadhi is when even that subject disappears and you are thrown into the state of Nothingness.
-
The feeling of otherness was strongly based on the fact that the seeds of thought were emerging from that point like if an invisible hand were disposing them or ordering them or something similar, like if were an intentionality behind. Usually I have difficulty with Dhyana/Samadhi distinction and terminology but definitely it seems much more related to what you describe here as Dhyana. But it was the very threshold, I suppose that if I would had managed to stay unattached to that sensation of otherness, probably I would remain there and ultimately go to the source and melt with “that” in a sort of Samadhi, or at least that´s what seems more plausible.
But ultimately the experience by it´s own simply had help me to grasp a better comprehension of the system and of a lot of concepts, by which ultimately I made a description of the universe in the Pantacle design of the Neophyte grade. Also near after that experience I knew somebody who awakened the “Nephesh demon” in me pushing me out of work, which correspond also to that grade, and apart other similar things related to that grade that as a whole have convinced me that the system serves well and with pretty accuracy as a coordinate system on which situate your own process of initiation, something of what I was not so aware previously, definitely. End with that, sorry for the extension but I think it needed a little context.