Embedded Files
from The Meaning of Life: Ascending Jacob’s Ladder by Hazy Notion
The hypothesis to be considered is that the Essene system of 490 year cycles was incorporated in the collective mind of monotheistic Europe. Further, that it has been dictating the timing of evolutionary progress for collective minds with European Christian backgrounds.
A plausible way of explaining the mechanism of this evolutionary progress is that it is a rocking motion. This rocking involves the collective mind stepping down one Sub-Theme, pausing, and then leaping ahead two. In regard to timing it involves stepping down one Sub-Theme and pausing for 231 years. This facilitates the necessary change of dominance from one mind stream to the other. Once the change of dominance has been completed, and the ethic of a new age have been firmly established in culture, the collective mind leaps ahead two Sub-Themes. The 231 years of higher culture are brought to an end by 28 years of cultural chaos and breakdown. This 28 year period is a preparation for the collective mind to step down one Sub-Theme again and switch to the dominance of the alternate mind stream. In this way the collective mind repeats the rocking process — down one Sub-Theme, pause, then up two.
From this angle the first 231 years of a monotheistic Christian ‘age’ is a low period, while the second 231 years is a high period. This pattern provides for a low and high theocratic age (Dark Ages), a low and high aristocratic age (Middle Ages), and a low and high plutocratic age (Modern Age). It means that during the Dark Ages, for instance, the collective mind was focussed on the Sub-Theme of Superstition for the first 231 years and only moved up to Piety for the second part of the age. Similarly, during the Middle Ages it was first Warrriorship, then Style. And for the Modern Age it was Piety for the first part and then Number for the second. If such a pattern actually exists, and if it continues to hold, the age that is set to follow the Modern Age will be split between Style and Wisdom.
If a fixed point could be located in this analysis of Christian history it would be possible to demonstrate the approach more graphically. It would also be possible to make some predictions about the future. Unfortunately, as happened to the Essenes when they tried to fix the date of the Messiah’s arrival, there don’t seen to be any points that can be fixed in history with any degree of certainty. Nevertheless, a plausible guess is sufficient to demonstrate the hypothetical pattern.
The guess identifies the point in time when the balance of the European collective mind shifted from polytheistic arrangements to a monotheistic structure. That is, when a critical mass of European collective mind shifted from an escalator to an elevator.
Throughout the early centuries of the Christian era adherents were content to use a calendar they had inherited from the Romans which counted time from the year of Rome’s foundation. This method of time-keeping was rooted in the ancient polytheistic traditions. However, early in the sixth century a monk from Scythia named Dionysius Exiguus produced arguments to show that Jesus was born in the year 753 A.U.C. (Anno Urbis Conditae, meaning the year of the foundation of the city — Rome). A movement then began within the Christian Church to date all events from that year. The purpose was to replace the foundation of Rome with the birth of Jesus as the historical event which marks the beginning of time.
Bearing in mind that Dionysius was mistaken by a few years in the date he chose the hypothesis, nevertheless, argues that his insight into the significance of time-keeping tipped the balance and shifted a critical mass of European collective mind into a monotheistic mode.
The year of Dionysius’s insight is somewhere in the range of 525-527 A.D. For the purpose of this exercise assume it was 526 A.D., and that this year marks the beginning of the low theocratic age. The fixing of this date provides the opportunity to demonstrate a hypothetical interpretation of European history according to the rhythm of world weeks (see Figure 16).
The Low Theocratic Age (526-757 A.D) was a period when the Christian faith was propagated through Superstition. The dynamic of this period was a focused struggle between belief in the Crucifixion of God’s son, Jesus, — as being the ultimate and final human sacrifice — and belief in superstitions associated with the ancient human sacrifice traditions of European paganism. This dichotomy had been argued for centuries but in 526 A.D., in one nation, within one language group, monotheistic principles finally gained the ascendancy over a collective mind for the first time. Let us assume this first happened in the collective mind of the Italian people. The Italians, then, held onto this advantage for more than two centuries and went on to become the ‘leading edge’ of monotheistic progress into the High Theocratic Age of Christian Piety, 757-988 A.D.
The Low Aristocratic Age, 1016-1247 A.D., was most probably led by France. It was a step down from Piety to Warriorship. As the rest of Europe followed suit the continent became unsettled and convulsed by war. For more than two centuries crusading and warfare totally preoccupied the minds of Europeans as they worked through their reversion to the identity of warriors.
But the reversion to Warriorship was only a preparation for the leap two levels up the Spectrum onto Style. The High Aristocratic Age was led by France and the feudal system was the form of social organisation that marked this period.
Figure 16 The Ages of Christian Monotheism
The German people came through as the leading edge for the breakthrough to Low Plutocracy. It was a return to Piety and was marked throughout by the conflict between Protestants and Catholics. However, Germany didn't retain the lead for long and was quickly overtaken as other nations of Northern Europe severed their links with Rome and reformed their Christian beliefs along Protestant lines. The Low Plutocratic Age was the era of worshipping God in the work-place, the invention of the work ethic, and cottage industries. During this period of Piety-focus the ethical foundations for our own High Plutocratic Age were established.
The mantle of leading edge appears to have been swapped around considerably during the Low Plutocratic era between Germany, Britain and other Protestant countries of Northern Europe. But by the time the Christian collective mind was ready to take the two steps up to Number in 1737 Britain was clearly in the lead. Soon after the new identity level was reached British scientists and inventors, utilising the new consciousness of Number, began to develop new technologies and systems that made possible the mass production of wealth. The industrial revolution, the age of factories and High Plutocracy were all born together as manifestations of the collective consciousness of the Status of Self through Number.
The year 1968 marks the end of the High Plutocratic in this scheme. Following this there was to be 28 years of cultural breakdown before the commencement of a new age in 1996. These specific dates, however, would only apply to the particular nation-based collective mind that was leading Christian progress at that point in time. The rest of the industrialised world would continue to practice the culture of High Plutocracy while they awaited the arrival of the new model of Low Gnostocracy.
Low Gnostocracy is to be an age of Style that lays down the ethical foundations for a future age of Wisdom. Education and academic titles are likely to play key roles in ordering this period. Although the hypothesis identifies 1996 as the start of the new cultural principle an indeterminate period might have to elapse before a recognisable working model becomes available. Reflection on historical events surrounding the Protestant Reformation and the establishment of Low Plutocracy might provide a useful analogy for understanding the processes involved in the switch from one cultural Theme to another.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse