Send me an Angel … Send me an Angel … Right Now:
A Certain Shade of Grey: So, in the last post, we discussed some aspects of masonic rituals centred on the Masonic initiations in the Master Mason degree. In the understanding, candidates are taken into the symbolic death of Hiram Abiff. Hiram, the architect of King Solomon’s Temple, also possesses the “Master’s word,” one of the secrets of a Master Mason. Unfortunately, he has a run-in with three ruffians, which would end the life of Hiram. He was buried, then moved and reburied under an acacia tree, and later on, was found by workers. A memorial was erected for him for the loss of the genuine secrets of the master mason; a ritual is founded here, though it’s strange considering the Solomon’s Temple, according to Biblical accounts, Solomon’s Temple had been finished. And it’s safe to say the symbolic meaning is not literal, and we’ve established its connections with Osiris.
Before we knew what the “word” was, Hiram represented consciousness; as he was buried, so did our consciousness and the imagination that came with it. W.L. Wilmshurst states: “the grave of Hiram is ourselves; we are the grave of the Master – the lost guiding light is buried at the centre of ourselves.” Hiram represents the higher consciousness that can build the Temple – the complete, integrated Self.
Our imagination was buried when the world spiritual order, a.k.a New World Order enterprise, injected its symbolic iconography of spheres into the forefront of our imaginal understanding. We must climb out of our symbolic grave to complete the Temple and find our integrated selves. Doing so, or flattening the earth, is a step towards that. And it’s inherently more advantageous for protestant Christians as the whole motive of a heliocentric idea was to slow down a protestant movement in Europe. And there is a sneaky prediction that if they can garner more acceptances for this abstract, they can reinvigorate a five centuries-old movement.
However, they follow the same patterns as Evangelicals with proof-texting when they base morality with half a sentence only in this regard, a protestant revival as a reaction to a heliocentric sorcery by the Jesuits. For example, the entire works of Newton are now only regulated to a specific moment of clarity that brought forth gravity. Furthermore, imply his moment of clarity is false to begin with. Rather Newton took inspiration from Hermes in his description of the sun transcribed from the emerald tablets. “Its [the sun’s] force is above all force, for it vanquishes every subtle thing and penetrates every solid thing” – Hermes. You can equate this to gravity, but it’s more ambiguous than that. It’s a weak comparative claim. And this claim was set up by Protestants as a subtext for magical philosophical disdain. For the hermetic axiom “as above so below,” to them, it’s a satanic proposition and, therefore, the whole of hermeticism.
Protestantism was never abolished, and there has been an anti-Catholic sentiment within conservative Protestants in the first place as a reactionary inheritance of their European counterpart. It’s in the conservative Christian-conspiracy sect that imparts the importance of an ethical ideal regarding a unified monotheistic framework. And it would seem this ideal should only favour their type of Christian ethical monotheistic worldview, not a Catholic one since there is already a Christian monotheistic framework. Their whole anti-sentiment ironically goes against monotheism itself. If they ever adopt a flattening earth movement, they’re also advocating for old gods to awake or at least acknowledge angelic worship [good or bad] comes with the territory.
And this stems from a conspiratorial idea that Catholicism [or its institutional managers] doesn’t truly uphold a Christian belief. And secretly worships pagan gods or fallen angelic deities behind its Christian iconography. [There is merit to this, given the vast amount of conspiratorial evidence]. However, it’s more about a hyper-focus on one side of the polarity, the conceptualization of the ‘all good, all knowing’ to bring heaven down to earth and ignore chaos inherent to our dual nature. Whether dualism dissolves the higher you raise your conception of good and evil into oneness – I’m not qualified to answer this [at a deeper level] as it raises more ethical questions. But, once you view evil as chaos, synonymous with the underworld that one must climb out of, this understanding would require a reintegration of self and is really what most people can grasp or relate to. And this is similar to Jung’s concept of integrating the shadow side.
The Old Testament gods are neither intelligent nor ethically good, even though they are supposed to have created a morally superior system. The Gnostics do not deny that evil exists but are made aware that the characteristics of the creator-God are always doing things incompatible with knowledge. That upon creation, something went wrong. So it means the higher you raise the conception of good and evil within an oneness philosophy, it would go back to relativism arguments if creation wasn’t perfect, to begin with. The Gnostics see this imperfect world in conjunction with the perfect upper Pleroma, and this is your soul’s spiritual aim, the upper Pleroma.
I once mentioned that the satellization cosmos might be the last false ideological stronghold, and if it breaks down completely you’re only left with sets of belief systems that is more overt and in plain sight. Rather ones which are cleverly hidden and in secret. The latter [satellization cosmos] as one type of secular framework depowers fallen angel worship because the collective intent has no full potential. You only need to take out the satellized sorcery aspect and reinvoke the original cosmos.
Otherwise, another theocratic empire with a new zeal for disenchanting a false cosmos would grow. And it would also be a fundamentalist movement, granted every religion has a form of fundamentalism. And fundamentalism is more of a style and Gnostic groups of their time were reactionary [meaning Gnostics were the fundamentalist of their time]. So I mean reactive movements that are more socially and theologically strict, like Evangelicalism. Because Evangelicalism is a Christian identity rather than a denomination, their conceptual level and understanding of Christianity is more distant, but I would also suggest ideological. The distance factor allowed them to redefine spiritual experiences to an inclusive framework of ‘born again’ spiritual experiences that differ from other awakening spiritual impulses because it’s also an emotional conversion in accepting Jesus Christ as their saviour.
Not only in the acceptance but an interactive sense of God’s presence [God personally communicates with them]. Alongside proselytizing or evangelizing candidates so they can be born again. Fundamentalism is propelled further into the extreme scale when biblical inerrancy [God’s divine words] must be seen without error. However, not all follow this doctrinal purity but still hold the Bible as authoritative. Almost all fundamentalists are evangelicals, but not all evangelicals are fundamentalists.
Evangelicals shared a common idea with the conservatives [new/neo-conservatives] about the United States being led down the path of ruin through Liberalism that started after the Vietnam War. Evangelicals saw this decline through the ruling class abandoning Biblical values in favour of a destructive doctrine they called ‘secular humanism.’ They agreed with the neo-conservatives about poverty, crime, drugs, the Soviet Union, etc. However, included was a focus on the breakdown of Biblically ordained family structures – and also a disdain for feminism, the legalization of abortion, and a general increase in secularization. Most American Christians are not evangelical Christians, and only 17 per cent [white] Americans are Evangelicals. And this small minority had a strong influence in politics that started with Reagan, where an Evangelical and Republican alliance would ensue – a successful pairing because of their loyalties to leaders and their motivation to vote as a religious obligation.
In the latter part of the 80s, Evangelicals, with their broad reach through televangelising, went through scandals. Some of their Evangelical leaders were against what they preached, especially about Biblically ordained family structures [hey, blame it on the sirens]. Most of their funding came through donations, the kinds of donations that were able to fund an evangelical theme park.
The Reagan era also prompted a Christian-conspiracy-theory culture starting with talk-back radio and then drifting to early internet chat forums. Where they borrowed evangelicals’ and neo-conservatives dislike [not just about Liberalism], but the government itself and their ruling class fundamentally threatening the beliefs and traditions of the American family. The conspiratorial side has some dismay with the government; however, confusingly, most conspiracy-theory mouthpieces alongside evangelicals and neo-conservatives accept their reason for war. And that the Holy Land [Jerusalem] needs to be reclaimed, certain events must come to pass, as stated in the book of revelation, to hasten the second coming. It must match Biblical revelation’s mandate and any precursor event for the second coming and apocalypse. And this makes Evangelical Right indistinguishable from Christian Zionism which is favoured more among Republicans.
Evangelicals certainly didn’t spearhead their hard values. It seemed to just align or overlap with a growing conservative secular ideal in the first place backed by media like fox news and magazines like national review [and X-files]. They gave a religious rationalisation that most conservatives may have wanted anyway. At the same time, they can’t mature out of their apocalyptic thinking, contributing to the collapse of civilisation, which is also incongruent with being born again spiritually. However, they set the criterion of religious dogma acting like a map, like an immovable pillar, and so when something like a memetic virus [wokeism] would inevitably come around, they repelled it and it couldn’t have its effect.
They succeeded in the Political arena but lost in the cultural area [and this is due to imagination being stifled]. And now they see themselves as minoritarian. They’ve given up the dream that their worldview can meld with the mainstream American perspective. Even so, their strong stance on policy and low-key scepticism of a ruling-class government would generate a reactionary Christian-conspiracy-theory culture. At the same time, the reactionary majority blame the left as a way to tunnel a type of propaganda [radicalism] into a type of scapegoating – probably as a way to circumvent their obvious part in the rise of totalitarianism. Which had its ascendency post-911 in the Bush era – the 911 event lifted the veil overtly.
There is always this implied assertion when [traditional and new] Christian-Conspiracy-fundamentalists decree a Masonic conspiracy that their Christian institution is somehow separate from that supposed agenda. [Or maybe they’re creating a memetic spell based on ignorance to wash away guilt or sin]. There was a time where evangelical Christianity made a formidable bid to displace Freemasonry. It never came to pass because Trinitarian Joachimism became the principal theoretical instrument for Masonic policy triumphing in the new world. And this came about through the foundation of Mormon Freemasonry with a focus on a secularized irenic inaugural leadership within a complex of social institutions and voluntary societies that preserved progressive American civic piety. Mormon Temple rituals, alongside Joachimite’s political inaugural aspects, are symbolically rooted in Royal Arch exaltation.
The Book of Revelation is an occult document to the dismay of Christian-Conspiracy-fundamentalists who identify occultism with Evangelicalism as a generalised doctrine of demons. It means to advocate the book of revelation; you must also accept it as an occult scripture. There are coded meaning embedded in it, meaning you can’t take it at surface value. It’s an allegory or a parable with coded messages – perhaps by initiates of mystery cults at the time. It could also be a story to pass on certain information to people with occult knowledge, which is important because when we see people taking it literally, it misses the point. And this often happens with the Bible and other texts from other religions, and people act out that incorrect worldview as one hundred percent real.
Having that in mind, the apocalypse [the second coming and reclaiming of the Holy Land] might not be literal; it’s less about the end of the world and more about the battle of good and evil that occurs at the heart of every human being. Which is more about the enlightenment process, and this can be apocalyptic in the sense that it destroys what reality is. The second coming of Christ probably means the enlightenment experienced by the individual practitioner, the Christ/Christos energy is born within their own body. And this differs from a born-again proposition as it has an exclusive wall.
Demonic Thought Forms: We determined that Heliocentrcisim was a Jesuit enterprise first before Freemasonry joined in the cosmic misdirection operation. To clarify, the enlightenment thinkers [most likely in the Rosicrucian Enlightenment sect] birthed modern [hyperreal] science like heliocentricism, which came out of an esoteric impulse. And for a brief period [in my speculation], became or morphed into the illuminati, another Rosicrucian order [that differed or did not share their brother’s ideology but still helped with the heliocentric concept], a group that didn’t last the eighteenth century. They were supposed to be a counter-reaction to the Jesuit order but may have been co-opted by the Rosicrucian Enlightenment.
Freemasonry has long been known to historians for its capacity to influence public affairs. Until recently, however, this was thought simply to be a general shaping of society by individuals impressed with its core principles of liberty and equality – the brotherhood of man and the fatherhood of God. With dwindling and ageing membership, Masonry stands a possible future where it’s nothing more than a repository of esoteric knowledge. And Rosicrucian’s offspring Theosophy is not a system of thought endowed by a deity; rather, it’s Divine Wisdom within us. Theosophy is a way of answering life’s “big” questions by trying to reconcile the varied approaches of science, philosophy, and religion without limiting themselves to their particular assumptions or ways. Instead, it relies on personages of intuitions and spiritual ecstasy while embracing all that is true and valuable in other approaches.
Having established Masonry and Theosophy’s seemingly innocent business model statements, there is still the same conspiratorial focus of fallen angelic worship behind their seemingly innocent synopses. And this is due to the seriousness of Secret-[State]-Cults’ use of Star Magic. And this makes it a complex area to parse; I think there needs to be a separation between angelic worship [watcher cults] and what Chaos is or hellish things in a philosophical and psychological sense. And this is because it touches upon a larger argument in philosophy – an argument that halters [or reimagines] oneness philosophy about the nature of the phenomenon.
We have these conscious experiences of colour and the shape of tactile pressure, but these phenomena are not the ultimate causes; Kant [a philosopher] was convinced that there was something beyond that. And this is reasonable because we don’t control our phenomenon; there is something out there that’s generating these sense perceptions and giving them to us. In a synchronistic level people started having internal relationship to the way the logos is unfolding. They started to see patterns on how things can unfold and make sense, and they started to realise that maybe those patterns had meaning to their reality. Consciousness of reality and reality itself, it’s a co-creating relationship between the symbols that are known to us and the relationship between the subjective and the objective. And there is applied-animism where it’s more intuitive than symbolic. While all of this questions the natural aspect and phenomenon of the environment, the same must be said for spiritual and paranormal activities [what we call contact].
John Dee, who had links to Rosicrucianism and was an individual the Masons admired since his whole shtick is about Enochian magic. He was inspired by the same memetic and complexity of ideas that we call Christian-Zionism [pre-apocalyptic millenarianism dispensationalism]. Had constant contact with angelic beings, and just exactly what kind of Angels were he in contact with? He was famous for his scrying sessions, and at times he got to a point where he and his colleague would make contact outside of the crystal, meaning contact with angel beings in the physical environment.
John Dee and Kelley moved from London to Prague and tried to convince the Holy Roman Emperor to get on board with what the angels wanted, which was to help them bring about this new world order and this apocalypse. Weirdly it angered the Catholic Church, and so the Jesuits tried to trick them into coming to Rome, where they would’ve been tortured and killed. Angels then told them to take all the records of the scrying sessions and destroy them in the fireplace [21 leather-bound books]. So they did, and the Jesuits could not get hold of the records; after they moved on, Kelley was in the house’s garden. And saw an angel moving in the garden with its feet hovering off the ground, and the angel led Kelley up the stairs to the fireplace, where they burnt the documents. Upon their report of seeing a door of light opened at the back of the fireplace, a hand comes out of the door of light and hands them back the destroyed books.
Whether you believe this story or not, they are projections, a tale that seems to slide between non-fiction and fiction with supernatural experiences of dark entities, angels, etc. They are stories that line up with modern-day fear of external governmental agencies, the illuminati and freemasonry with secret conspiracies behind the scenes. That people are out there to get us alongside entities of the spiritual world. The conspiracy is real, but it’s also a demonic thought form and is not an external entity but rather something that is projected inside of us outwards – our fear of that makes it real. Human consciousness allows us to have infinite choices and experiences, and the way of Sharman understands that it’s your choice; you can shift your attention, experience or focus, which is true magic, tends to be what you end up experiencing.
The Transcendence of Evil: The conspiracy is real but has to whirl between conspiracy and conspiracy theory, so it’s a battle between the two at a propositional level. And both are required to get a resemblance of truth because it’s carried in propositions and results in beliefs, which is not knowing that. What if you manifest a conspiracy theory that is not true but becomes a conspiracy theory? Due to the misreading of Derrida and Foucault and by attributing them to the claim that the ‘power’ they identify is the central spirit. In other words, into a Satanic adversary, but merely a modified Marxist claim directed through a specific subset of post-war philosophy [post-structuralism, deconstruction] in postmodernism [now neo-Marxist].
Having been proven wrong and yet insisting their misinformation is real to the public and not retracting the false claim is an attempt to validate a false conspiracy-theory, which then becomes a [unintentional] fundamentalist claim as well a demonic thought form. Derrida and Foucault looked at platonic idealism, a.k.a; the philosophy of Plato and Christian meta-physics led to the hierarchy tendency of philosophy. Truth is a vertical journey that starts from the propositional as it moves towards the procedural, then the perspectival, and participatory. And building on this – both were interested in how they used idealism and Christian logic to make absolute claims, like truth and power.
The acquisition of power was not what Derrida and Foucault were concerned about; to an extent, the analysis of the way power functions and how it functions in society was important to them. Derrida talks about power; however, his method of deconstruction is not a method of gaining power but about undermining claims to constant knowledge – or problematizing trends of acquiring knowledge in western philosophy. Likewise, Foucault’s work on genealogical history was not about how to gain power; he looked at how power has been used, abused and modified throughout history.
Our relationship to power and the criterion for realness should be properly acknowledged rather than made absolute or set up as antithesis. We’ve mentioned the confusion in the order of abstraction in general semantics. When one identifies the word with the label, there is confusion when the label stands for the image or the ‘thing itself – ‘the map is not the territory.’ We can’t capture the relevance of our proposition within the syntax or the semantics of the propositions; that’s the main thing Derrida was about.
The claim that power is a fundamental reality or culture is about the claim; that the drive to power is at the core of western beings. It is an equally nihilistic claim; it attempts to heal the wound of nihilism but is fundamentally mistaken in its endeavour. It’s constituted the wrong way or framing the problem the wrong way. So, you don’t get insight into the solution rooted in the problem.
Derrida was critical of elements of western civilisations the same way any philosopher would be – a big part of doing philosophy is looking back historically on the traditions and critically modifying previous assumptions. Descartes [I think therefore I am] developed his form of rationalism, which involved criticising previous assumptions of western subjectivity – that go back to Plato or Aristotle. It doesn’t mean Descartes is an enemy of western philosophy; it just means he engages with that tradition. His rearticulating classical philosophical questions in his era and Derrida’s method [deconstruction] aim for an internal critique, looking for a critique internal to the text itself. Derrida and Foucault simply wanted to push philosophy beyond a traditionalist, Platonist paradigm and search for a more just and democratic thought.
To suggest western governments and universities worldwide are being influenced by people who are followers of Derrida and Foucault [a subset of postmodernism] – a satellised version of postmodernism, a leftist golem. Postmodernism had been framed wrongly. There is no evidence for this, but it’s obvious that a particular subset of postmodernism is being used as a strawman, which gives the sorcerer a type of lefty intellectual bogyman to fight against. Essentially profiteering from the ignorant and it has such an effect. You even have synchro-mystics proclaiming a notion of post-postmodernism, which there is no need for since the proposition was incorrect, to begin with. More evidence suggests that woke-isim and identity politics came out of the new-atheist movements rather than postmodernism.
However, in that they’re made aware of their mistakes – there is still the symptomatic problem, and it’s something deeper, more mystical, and in terms of ages, longer. And it feeds off things like polarised, Hegelian, and dual conflicts. Some call it an Egregore, but is closer to Steiner’s notion of a cosmic being called Ahriman. Steiner examined that Superstition science [or scientific superstitions] was the illusion and means employed by Ahriman. Humans and their different groups are at odds with each other and can be seen in our modern-day political arena. [“These Ahrimanic powers are at work wherever disharmonies between groups’ people arise” – Steiner]. Ordered-liberty-conservative-intellects have done equal damage by miss-framing postmodernism. So there is validation in making aware of the memetic virus [wokeisim] arising [they’re just finger-pointing in the wrong direction], but in doing so, given manifestation to a demon of their own.
| These Ahrimanic powers are at work wherever disharmonies between groups’ people arise, but let’s take a very characteristic example to show what most of these things are based upon. Our modern proletariat now looks to Karl Marx; it is worth studying how the teachings of Karl Marx spread among the modern proletariat and how they gave rise to a never ending flood Marxist literature. This literature fully embrace the scientific mode, everything is rigorously supported with proof and evidence so rigorously in fact where one who though was immune to Marxism have in fact succumb to it. The fate of Marxism was to spread first of all through the proletariat, while academic institutes dispute it and rejected it, now there are a numbers of academics who can no longer resist the logic of Marxism. Who acknowledge and can no longer escape it because Marxist literature as gradually has become apparent offers subtly congruent conclusions. With a modern scientific outlook and motive thinking the propositions of Marxism can very nicely proven. The middle classes didn’t have their own Karl Marx to prove the opposite, but it would’ve been possible. You see just as one can prove the ideological character of law, ethics, etc., and the theory of added value, and axiom’s of materialistic history from a Marxist perspective. So one can equally prove exactly the opposite about all such things. It would be perfectly possible for bourgeoisie Marx to prove exactly the opposite in the same rigorous way without any distortion or underhand aims. Such evidence would certainly stand and this is because modern human thinking, the modern intellect lies in a stratum of our being that prevents reaching down to access realties. This is why one can prove one thing and its opposite equally well both with an equally rigorous procedure. Today it is possible with equally valid logic to prove the truth of spiritualism on the one hand, and materialism on the other. These conflicting perspectives coalesce with each other with equal right because modern intellectualism lives in an upper Stratham of reality and does not plunge the depths of existence. The same apply to partisan viewpoints of all kinds. If we do not comprehend this, and simply absorb such things through our upbringing; family through the particular condition we live in, and the politics of the day. We might honestly believe our partisan view to be well founded and yet we have just fallen or slipped into it. And find ourselves in conflict with people who likewise slipped into their own partisan position, both opposition will be equally valid. And this brings chaos and confusion over humanity, the convulsion it causes will continue to increase if humanity does not come to see this. And in this confusion is something that Ahrimanic powers employ again to prepare their triumphed incarnation. – Steiner |
Steiner was a student of Theosophy [post-Blavatsky] in the German branch but divorced himself from it due to a conflict of interest regarding fellow teacher Krishnamurti. However, Steiner was showing indifference towards Theosophy itself as Blavatsky found Christian doctrines inferior to the wisdom of the east. However, Steiner was intrigued by the concept of ‘the Christ event’ and was also a natural clairvoyant.
We have early signs of esoteric Christianity formulating in Steiner as he continued to work alongside […] and an unnamed intellect to formulate concepts of karma and rebirth.
| Steiner’s cosmology also corresponds to the Theosophical view, with its aeons-long perspective on the enfoldment of spirit into matter. Steiner gives more emphasis, however, to the role of superhuman evil in the process. He stresses that long before human incarnation on this planet, the Godhead decided that “humanity certainly could have developed well, but could become even stronger if obstacles were put in its way” – Smoley, R. |
These obstacles have primarily taken the form of two cosmic beings, Lucifer and Ahriman. We discussed Lucifer at length; that is, not Satan. And the whole Luciferin agenda is not real in an empirical sense. However, fallen angel worship [watcher cults] exists in secret through a network that spans the state, country, and empire; the evidence is apparent through hoaxes, false flags, rituals, symbology, secret societies, etc.
Steiner sees Lucifer as the source of pride and is correct to signify Lucifer with pride because, as we established, the supreme lord of light is Samyaza [the angel of pride] – and Ahriman is the name of evil principle as portrayed in Zoroastrianism. Also, Ahriman, by contrast, is responsible for our mechanical ingenuity and for technical inventions [Ahriman’s technologies]. In a sense, The God of the Machine Ahriman will incarnate [as an anti-Christ archetype] in this century, as prophesied by Steiner.
In Baudrillard’s fable, our reality exists only as rotting shreds attached to the map; this is the state of our age, according to Baudrillard. So that the model itself is likened to human existence, the real has become irrelevant and undefinable and clings only as vestiges. In a sense, Ahriman is the glue when we cling to the map, and in contrast, Lucifer [Samyaza] would have us leave this world all too soon.
Neither Lucifer nor Ahriman is adversarial; rather, one feeds off the other in the sense there is a Lucifer of light and false light Lucifer. The Ahriman impulse utilizes false light and left brain thinking; now we have Ahriman’s technologies or Ahriman’s artificial intelligence. There is no doubt that the notion of artificial intelligence, where it will come to life as a sentient being with form and a soul, will never be realized. And are often romantic babblings of pseudo-science and the elites who finance them because of their innate fear of the uncertain, judgement or death.
| We have Ahriman incarnating in Ghost in the Shell as project 2501 [Puppet Master], a sentient beyond A.I. intelligence but rather a living thinking entity born in a sea of information. It’s archetypically angelic, and you see the drawings sliding between femineity and masculinity. |
There is a dichotomy in mainstream science for the evaluation of spirit – and also in the psychological philosophy when discussing the good and the bad spirit. However, that dichotomy can answer what science won’t delve into and how we understand evil. For example, Carl Jung states – in his red book about the boy:
| In any form the archetype of the spirit appear in situations he is never 100 percent certain that the spirit figure in dreams are morally good, often they appear not only ambivalent, but dam right malicious, who knows about the great plan, and how much evil is necessary to bring about the good by enantidromia and which good tend to want evil … wait and see. |
So on the way to profound and real religious experience, the human being is not simply made with already made desires and solutions, but is …
| Confronted with the problem with uncertainty of moral evaluation with the confusing interplay of the good and bad, and the inexorable con-cassanation of guilt, suffering and redemption. And this way is right, but how many can recognize it; it is the old voice sounding from a distance, it is ambiguous, doubtful and dark, and sometimes means danger and risk an uncertain path, one can only take for the sake of by the wheel of God, without security and without sanction. |
It means the experiences of the non-physical world are different; this can be shown in dreams and visions of our reality. They often involve ambivalent experiences of light and dark interacting in weird ways; this engagement of interacting with spirits is not a series of episodes but a process. Jung divided this process into three; war – magic – religion. First, war; is a conflict between right and left, between the morally acceptable and morally not-acceptable and so forth, then magic; a period of transformation, the magical change, then religion; moving into the ultimate source, which is the god within.
The psycho-spiritual transformation of the psyche is akin to the enlightenment, which involves contact with light. Moreover, it also touches upon the notion of Henosis [what postmodernist was touching upon]. The summation of the neo-platonic ascent, the one within you becomes one within, one without until there is only the one. The ultimate one-ment and atonement, the ultimate healing of that which is existentially distressing to us, separated from the ground of reality within and without, and also separating them.
