What I was alluding to in one sentence was that the 50's cohort held Ralph in much higher esteem than Harvey. I did not realize my sentence was a little misleading. The possibility that Ralph is the actual "writer" of the monographs might seem "farfetched" today. Falcone probably heard that Lewis wrote them and assumed it was HSL because of the Lewis surname. However, HSL merely dictated the body of material to Ralph. Ralph then transcribed and sent out the monographs.
Anyways, the main point of my article was to show that the new are truly more valuable as a spiritual tool than the old. They have evolutionized with the time by adding to the old. The old stuff is still there written as it was close to a century ago(and longer). I was hoping to show that HSL was not in fact the author of the monographs since so many people today idolize him. In fact, even if he did have the first ones printed, how could he claim authorship considering the early lesson of not claiming ownership?
The Falcone article claims that HSL wrote monographs that had a more mystical power behind them. My article refutes this idea. I never attributed any magical power to early monographs or HSL or Ralph. The article I wrote was intended as an email for someone who wanted to buy older monographs. It was a discouragement for placing the older monographs on a pedestal and my own personal belief of their history.
Please go back and reread the article. Then ask yourself how important lineage is.
We not spiritual enuff to discuss anything really heavy as evidenced by the preponderance of posts here on the Rosicrucian breakup. I have tried to inject some silliness to draw out what I presume are the more relunctant new fraters who think they dont have anything to say.
I do remember reading an old Rosicrucian Digest with a sort of testimonial page on eveyday problems the A.M.O.R.C. members solved in ways that surprised even them.
"I didn't know it would work and it did". That is exactly what H S Lewis exaulted and it was probably a hard sell for him at times because this was before the "New Age" . The idea that a housewife could do welding was heritical enough without adding on the closet priestess stuff. Wasn't anything sacred? HS Lewis seemed to redefine and expand the universe and drop it in little chunks on our laps that we could appreciate.
Still I have said oft: the world took rather a lot of wrong or odd turns and I cant imagine HSL could have imagined it would turn out like this!
>george
I'd like to make a few remarks to tie up some loose ends in this string.
First of all: I realize after a second careful reading that Frater Clint is arguing from nearly the same position as I am (i.e. the new monographs are appropriate for the times). Pardon if I misrepresented your views.
Second: I must address points made by our revered Frater Gruntal. At one point he wrote:
"It is all a moot point anyway because, as all aspiring mystics know, the 'goodies' were never written down to begin with and the instructions all have blinds and half truths and intentional misconceptions to fool the unworthy. Indeed it is a practical joke amongst the hierarchy that more gibberish you put out the more devoted will be the followers."
Hmmmm. OK. It is a remark that one commonly comes across in reading "occult" and "mystical" literature that one can't learn any "secrets" from books, because the adepts never write down the unvarnished truth, and because they introduce deliberate errors into the texts to fool the uninitiated, since the initiate will recognize the inconsistency and correct it in his one practice. I'm not so sure I buy this, but I've seen it often enough, especially in things on the "magickal" and "Crowellian" wavelength. It is also among such folk that one might come across the mentality in which the higher-ups have contempt and lack of respect for the neophytes and lower ranks, and consequently make sport of getting them to do silly stuff. I've never seen any such thing in AMORC. I'd also like to say that, although I'm not going to say that Frater Gruntal is doing this deliberately, saying that "the instructions all have blinds and half truths and intentional misconceptions to fool the unworthy" is tantamount to mental poisoning. It's not that serious, since I suspect there are no impressionable neophytes in this forum, if there were, Frater Gruntal would have it on his head that he interfered in the trust a member has for those initiating him. Picture the sincere student who, rather than faithfully studying and meditating on his lessons, begins to engage in a destructive guessing game as to whether this principle being presented to him is just a piece of bull**** to test his credulousness. Not the best frame of mind for study. The order tells people not to take anything on faith, but to prove it to themselves through experimentation. BUT, it asks that one entertain all information presented with an open mind, and to regard it as having the definite possibility of being true. Quite a different state of mind than scanning the lake and trying to spot the decoys, BECAUSE YOU'RE SURE THOSE *******S ARE SLIPPING DECOYS IN TO MAKE A FOOL OF YOU.
I will be the first to say that I appreciate Gruntal's very unique point of view. Indeed, he has, on occasion, managed to shake me out of complacency and see a difficult truth. I thank him for that. But on this occasion I think he was shooting way wide of the mark and endangering bystanders.
In this vein, I will also point out his remark that "We not spiritual enuff to discuss anything really heavy as evidenced by the preponderance of posts here on the Rosicrucian breakup." We? Why don't you speak for yourself? I think Frater Lemos shows a very spiritual nature in his selfless efforts to maintain this site. He sure ain't doin' it for fame and fortune. And I imagine there are quite a few very spiritual folks in the wings. Preponderance? A preponderance has to be more than 50 percent. Granted there was a huge amount of traffic on that topic some time back, but there's been much more discussion of other topics. I know that I recently got that skeleton back out of the closet, but that was because I had been told a story by a longstanding Rosicrucian whom I respect, and since I live in Hungary, and the Order is only eight years old here (I'm American and am a member of the English Grand Lodge in Britain), I thought this would be a good place to get some rumor control, which is what I named my posting. I regretted it afterward, but the forum software here doesn't allow you to withdraw or edit a posting.
I hope this is of some use to you, fraters and sorors, and I hope Frater Gruntal takes it in the spirit it was meant in. I'm just trying to say he should be a touch more careful.
Theo
I am flattered anyone took me seriuosly in anything other then math or science. indeed it gets to a point (at least in these forums) I am surprised that ANYBODY is listening to me. I have seen the "spiritual" side of BBSing (and now InterNet) go gradually bust and die. the post in this forum have sank to far and between as the controversies subsided. that isnt good.
if i seemed crazy at times and like a loose shot gun it is probsbly because I wondered and wondered how I could reach the fringes of spiritualy out there I knew existed but wasnt posting or contributing.
I know the "stained glass" mentality never worked on me! I felt more like the person who would naught even step in the temple but stood outside and slapped himself in the head a few times and said: "well I dont deserve this but I want it anyway and I feel for the others who are afraid to come even this far"
I never thought I would come this far .....
>george
I'm here. Let's talk!
By the way, what I wrote concerning deliberate deception only applied to monographs intended for the study of members. What is published for the public must, of necessity, be watered down. I still don't believe they contain anything intentionally misleading, but "the real goodies" as Frater Gruntal would call them, are diluted or withheld.
a classic example of deception, common to many modern fraternal teachings, is to play down the time element. most people entering this sort of study have preconceived notions of time and when they hear about the enevitable payoffs of spirituality they naturally assume a few years or decades at the most.
when the experiments end in frustration or failure it is only then that the reality of time is admitted: it takes a number of lifetimes to achieve anything in this field and that means HUNDREDS of years! I have even heard it said metaphysics wont work for anyone untill they change their DNA and that usually entails thousands of years of natural evolution.
The thought has occurred to me the system of study is less a effort of improvement then one of "weeding out the incompetent".
I think that is very deceptive! mayby I am stretching semantics but then Ralph Lewis did the same in his "Guilty of War" essay and he was right to do that at the time. I dont think any of me sarchasm could match the betrayal of encouraging a student with false promises of advancement they wont see in many many lifetimes to come!
>george
George,
It depends on what you mean by "Advancement". Many, myself included were attracted by the promise of being able to perform seeming miracles. However in my case , there was also the compelling desire to help out my fellow man. The ability to do amazing things seemed to be just a by product of ones search for enlightenment, not the object of the search.
There are no incompetents on the mystical path. If one sincerely searches, there will be rewards. Is not the ability to change ones circumstances and perceptions of life experiences a sufficient proof of mystical growth? There are those that could misuse mystical advancement however. One who tries to control his fellow man instead of help them is an example.
One thing about enlightenment. After one reaches enlightenment, you still have to live in this life. You will still have some frustrations. You still will have more to learn. You must still support yourself.
There is a saying that sums this up. "Before Enlightenment, must fetch water and chop wood. After Enlightenment, must fetch water and chop wood."
However your attitude will be different toward life experiences. I hope this helps you some brother.
Gary
Frater Clint and All members,
Originally in 1914 to 1917 there were no monographs as such. They were lessons given to Dr. Lewis to be read to the members in the Lodge sessions. All instructions were supposed to be presented in oral form. The Order was growing too slowly in this form, so the first supplementary material prepared by Dr. Lewis were the Cromaat Monographs. These were mailed to the members. The next step was the monograph in which Dr. Lewis presented the material given to him, plus changes and added material. He demystified mysticism and made the written material more palatable to Americans and later the whole world. He was lucky to have his son, Ralph, to help him with all the details. He was one that liked to dictate to a secretary and let others, possibly Ralph Lewis finish the monograph. He would attune himself with the Cosmic and was then able to contact the RC egregore. I hired a secretary in my practice that worked for AMORC a number of years. She never became an AMORC member, believe it or not, but she was allowed to transcribe many of the monographs dictated by Dr. Lewis. This may help explain Ralph Lewis' connection with the early monographs. Later Ralph rewrote some of the monographs to bring them up to date. The 12th degree monographs were never updated. The order wanted to keep them as they were originally written by Dr. Lewis. I am sure that even Imperator Christian Bernard will not change any of them in any significant way.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
http://www.rc-salon.com/salon/sanctum_items/sanctum_items.html
The Rosicrucian Salon. This is one link I which aroused my interest in earlier monographs. The article by Niger Falcone is misleading in a way and some of it might be false. He states ,"...I got my hands on Monographs from the 1970s, which, in turn, touched a quest for earlier material. Eventually, I acquired a file of the first monographs sent to Home Sanctum members and am now in the process of completing a file of the early Temple Lectures." Notice, he claims he has the first monographs in addition to ones from the 60's. There are several different monograph series up until the current monographs.
The way Falcone makes it seem is that HSL wrote the first series of monographs. Falcone states ,"The later monographs are sufficient to put one on the path of Mystical studies but Dr. H. Spencer Lewis put so much of his Soul and Spirit into the earliest that, even now after all of these years, to sit down and study them gives one the feeling the Dr. Lewis is in the room talking to you." The earliest monographs I have seen are written from someone elses perspective besides HSL. I believe these monographs are from the 40's. So, Falcone must be wrong claiming HSL sent the first monographs or has mistaken the early Temple lectures and CroMaat monographs as the original system.
Once, I attempted getting the earliest material from an older member. After many failed attempts at relieving him of them, he told me what I suspected. He claimed that the differences between monographs are not very different but that the newer ones have more material excluded from the first. I believe the current system is derived from the French version.
I told the man that I wanted to find original monographs by HSL. He told me to go to San Jose and search the vaults. He also said that all of the monographs were written by Ralph. I did not believe him at this point. I asked what HSL first sent to members and he said that they sent Temple lectures which he had photo copied. He was willing to let me see them but wanted to ask someone higher up if it was all right.
I think that Falcone's letter must be misleading. I am of the opinion that HSL sent CroMaat monographs and the Temple Lectures amongst other things to the original 1919 members. However, these were not a monograph system like we have today.
It is often noted that HSL wrote until the year of his death. Therefore, the complete monograph system could not have existed before Ralph took over. I believe Ralph is the transcriber/compiler/co-author of the earlier monographs. Ralph merely took HSL lecture transmitted to him mouth to ear and compiled them.
It may sound far fetched, but the 50's cohort of AMORC members held Ralph in high esteem. It is possible Falcone has at the use of the surname Lewis, mistaken Ralph for Harvey.
I hope that there aren't earlier materials which I am not aware of. I truly believe that the eraliest monograph system was implemented by Ralph and still obtainable clandestinely through rare sources. A copy of 70's monographs will vary very little from 30's series. I have searched for several years trying to find original HSL monographs but have come to conclude that the originals are compiled by Ralph.
LLL,
Frater Clint
I am wondering if it really does matter the author of these very wonderful monographs that we AMORC students are exposed to. The changing system of instruction is very necessary so as to adapt the teachings to the changing reality. After all does all things not change except change itself.
I think, more important, is our attunement with the Cosmic and the egregore of the mystics. Even we, even we (repetition deliberate) could compose these monographs when properly guided. What I am driving at is that the inner teachings are even more important than the outer, and constitutes the driving force of the latter. This is what accounts for the open-end nature of these monographs. By the way, does any one the very last monograph of the graded study of AMORC?
