Path: ultra.sonic.net!news From: nagasiva@luckymojo.com (nagasiva) Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.freemasonry,alt.thelema,alt.magick,talk.religion.misc Subject: 'Spiritual Organizations' (was The 'Misplaced' Masonic Keys) Date: 24 Jul 1999 00:05:34 -0700 Organization: Sonoma Interconnect,Santa Rosa,CA(us),http://www.sonic.net Lines: 179 Message-ID: <7nboju$vin@bolt.sonic.net> Reply-To: spam@luckymojo.com NNTP-Posting-Host: bolt.sonic.net X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.1 (NOV) Xref: ultra.sonic.net alt.magick.tyagi:17481 alt.freemasonry:95664 alt.magick:152112 talk.religion.misc:293659 49990211 IIIom E6 a correspondent wrote: # regards to SD-SR Masonry is: was it always just a "good ol' boys" # network, or do its current functions and membership represent a # falling away from some earlier loftier purpose? this still reminds me of a 'have you stopped beating your wife?' type of question as long as you presume that Freemasonry's current functions and membership don't *have* some loftier purpose (e.g. universal kinship, the preservation and instruction of important social knowledge). I'd refer you again to the freemasonry elist which catya, my partner, mentioned previously as a forum in which such a question could be asked (though I'd lurk there for a while and see if they really are just an "good ol' boys network"). from my vantage point it seems to be something more than this, and it is pretty easy to misunderstand the taxonomical degeneration of quasi-masonic orgs (e.g. from British to French, German and American) as somehow central to the tradition. 333: #> just because #> some Crowleyites have forgotten (or never learned) the deeper #> concepts behind the symbols inherent to popular rites, this #> doesn't mean that there isn't a thriving esoteric discussion #> ongoing in the halls of Thelema. # ...my inquiry is # directed more to the concept of entropy as it affects organizations # and bureaucracies, specifically ones that claim to have "levels" # of understanding that differentiate between generally "exoteric" # and "esoteric" knowledge. Does the perceived need to conceal or # play down the latter over time lead to disappearance of the Gnosis # in favor of merely the symbols of it? having only just begun to look seriously at Freemasonry in any depth, I may not be the best of sources, but I will be forwarding my missive to my kindred in Freemasonic circles. what I understand is that these 'levels of esoteric understanding' are not claimed by Freemasons so much as quasi-masonic religious and occult groups like the Theosophists, Rosicrucians, Goldawnians and some Crowleyites who may have been launching off Albert Pike and his French reflections. that is, there appears to have been a spiritual (rather than simply an ethical) overlay to the initiation schema of original Freemasonry which was presumed to confer psychospiritual maturation or knowledge fit for those of a certain level of such maturation, rather than practical instruction for those who had reached a certain stage of study in architectural (i.e. practical Freemasonry) or conventional (i.e. speculative Freemasonry) subjects (like the 7 Liberal Arts and Sciences). I have heard it suggested many times that these were PROTESTANT rebels who were out to fabricate their own alternative to the Roman Catholic Church (dressing up in fabulous robes, articulating the names of the divine, conferring spiritual power and a sacred ritual tradition, ostensibly engaging some mammothly important spiritual enterprise for the benefit of themselves and all human beings). the initiatic framework appears within this same RC Church, though the notion of spiritual development as a reflection of the organizational structure does not appear to have passed into all the traditions of Freemasonry. Pike and his 'Scottish Rite' does seem to adopt alot of hierarchical and esoteric language which can imply this, and his poor scholarship and conman style seems to be accepted without critical scrutiny by a large number of Scottish Rite adherents (compare him with Levi or LaVey and their fans). but your question is a very important one, and one of the reasons that I have argued so strenuously in favor of continuing to see the degrees above IIIrd in my Order ((c)OTO) as extensions of administrative status rather than matriculted spiritual levels. the latter can be valuable for those who have the privilege (or the bad luck :>) to engage the deeper organizational structure, but as it becomes a more widespread belief it could totally corrupt the Order from the inside out by turning it into a sanctified mystery cult without a thelemic, individually- centered and practical, character. I'd say that your question is backwards, however, in the way that it is phrased. rather than an entropic degrading of orgs over time proceding from a need to conceal the differentiation between exoteric and esoteric knowledge, I would say that we are dealing with different KINDS of organizations here: (1) membership clubs like the Church of Satan or the Elks, which presume to focus upon certain common interests (2) mystery clubs like the original Freemasons and the (c)OTO, which attempt to convey social data through a system of dramatic initiations that constitute common membership experiences and have special roles for those who are deeply involved with the administration (3) matriculation clubs like the Golden Dawn and possibly some Rosicrucians, which function in a way somewhat like universities of esoterics, centering on their knowledge- base as the curriculum of study, yet which also sometimes associate a level of personal and spiritual development with ascendance through the rites of initiation and involvement with the organization as a whole (4) sanctified mystical orders like the Rosicrucians and possibly Martinists, the Temple of Set or the variety of Catholic fraternities such as the Franciscans or Jesuits, which intend to carry out some spiritual enterprise and simultaneously presume a level of spiritual authority based upon their position within the larger organization, initiations or no. it seems to me that organizations can grow and change from one to another of these categories, fracturing into extensions or alternatives where there is insufficient approbation to allow the development within the greater social structure. your question presupposes that there is a 'Gnosis' which has in some way been integrated into organizational structures and has been 'lost' over time. I gather that you also associate some intellectual apprehension of the depth of meaning in the symbolism within an organization's materials, rites, etc., with this 'Gnosis', perhaps even associating, as is popular, some sort of spiritual awareness or maturity with this apprehension. finally, here's my response: I think it is facile to isolate this spiritual maturity within organizations, presuppose that it must for some reason be 'hidden', or to presume that it can be passed on from generation to generation THROUGH these organizations. my impression is that those who sincerely underwent maturation in association with the symbols and ideas inherent to these organizations often mis- understood the nature of spiritual instruction (overemphasizing the power of words and symbols to convey it and neglecting the conditions of the individual and their unique path of maturity). they attempted to codify or institutionalize their knowledge set (which I regard as comparable to idolizing a shed skin when in the form of a single curriculum, emphacizing a single paradigm when in the form of symbolic initiation). this no more made their students wise or spiritually mature than would the construction of a university make students intelligent or ethically mature. it is only a tool by which those who are ready and able to achieve this for themselves may profit, and those who administer these institutions are no more spiritual, wise, or intelligent by virtue of their participation than those who do not. they are merely the inheritors of a particular toolset or artifact which we may find completely valueless and corrupt. instead I would ask how it was that anyone began to associate 'Gnosis' with organizational processes, how individuals are benefitting from feuding religious biases and fallacious claims, and whether it isn't more important to use organizations to support the sovereignty of the individual (a real Protestant and liberal spirituality) rather than sink into the quagmire of sanctified initiatic schemes for the purpose of religious competition and pseudo-spiritual self-aggrandizement. it is one thing to provide an assessment of an individual or oneself based upon organizational METAPHORS which imply very important things about one's spiritual development, but it is quite another (and a dangerous alternative I feel) to begin to IDENTIFY a specific human organization as the only standard. this type of fanaticism is one I have always found worthy of strong opposition, whether in organizations of which I am a member or in those in which I refuse to take part. E666 and blessed beast! __________________________________________________________________________ (333) tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html -- emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired