Julian Lord:
> > And (also generically), one would not normally actually wish to
> > _return_ from such a state at all.
> ... but there's the usual terminology problem here. Non "mystics",
> non "orthodox" mystics, "failed" mystics, and, generally, non-Easterners
> (including the GLs themeselves) would (IMO) normally except to return
> to a state of personal consciousness ...
Right; but it would be questionable in the extreme whether most of the above ever reached "universal unconsciousness" at all. Certainly they _are_ reaching a non-personal state, and then returning from it (to some degree).
> ... and what special name would you use to describe a mystic HQ
> anyway ?
Er, good question. The term just makes me antsy, since while we have a decent idea what a theistic "HeroQuest" is like, other systems are vaguer (and mysticism most of all, for me).
> Indeed, but it seems that the pre-Golden Ages are at least strongly
> contemporary with those states of Cosmic Unconsciousness, and
> further that going to those Ages (if possible) would demand that the
> Traveller abandon his conscious self.
Yeah, I think that's true. That this is possible without becoming a guy with Pointlessly Obtuse Mysticism 10WWWWWWWWWWWWW (leaving aside "easy", or indeed "having any point" for the moment) is probably indicative of... something. I suppose the difference is that theists (say) go to the Green Age essentially just to experience being chucked out of it, which must be rather "easier" (relatively speaking...) than trying to fully identify oneself with it, etc.
> But I still think that the GLs would have considered it as the first state
> of _physical_ being ; and given their basic materialism and humanism,
> probably the first state of non-Divine/Created being, full stop/period.
Sounds reasonable. Physical being and elementdom sound pretty much synonymous to me.
> Yeah, the Great God thread was a rather inconclusive one, wasn't it ...
>
> ;-)
Oh yes.
Simon Phipp:
> Don't the Buddhists have examples of people who have achieved enlightnment
> but have chosen to return to help people here? Similarly, Mystics in
> Glorantha could experience a state of Unconsciousness and then return to
> share knowledge with others, or even to help others achieve the state.
Indeed. I think the Kralori are very much in this camp, for example. This is, though open to the counter-jibe that "by definition", if you _truly_ reached the ultimate state of consciousness, you would not have come back. (Two forms of competing mystical oneupmanship: more compassionate than thou, and more transcendent than thou.)
> Cosmologies only detail those parts that are of interest. So, troll
> cosmology could include a "appearing from Chaos" age, a "creation of
> Wonderhome" age, a "creating gods" age, an "Uz" age, a "Hurtplace" age
> and a "back to now" age. They would not care that there was a
> Blue/Green/Golden/Storm Age elsewhere. Parts of their ages would be able
> to be mapped onto the GL schema, so HurtPlace would clearly be when Yelm
> entered Hell and defeated the trolls, driving them to the surface, but
> they would not know or care about how Orlanth killed Yelm. It is outside
> their cosmology.
Right. One could certainly define a "partial map" from the elemental progression to just about any mythology one likes; it may though be sketchy in some places, and positively absent in others.
> Troll Mysticism would concern becoming One with the Darkness, Merman
> Mysticism would involve merging with the Waters. Both of which could have
> an element of returning to the Black and Blue Ages respectively. Obviously,
> there would be more to it than this.
These are probably not "mysticisms" in the Gregly sense, of being separate ascetic practices. The above would describe, though "the mystical part of uz religious practice (theism/animism)", etc.
Trouble is, there is, as far as I know, no single magical or religious system that gives you a "choice" as to whether to go back to a "Black Age" on the one tentacle, or a "Blue Age" or another. You pretty much just get one "first state of consciousness". So it's generally only possible to compare the two in an external sense: to wonder whether "Black Age Consciousness" for the Uz is truly more primal/early than is "Blue Age Consciousness" for the merpeeps. I don't know that one can usefully distinguish between them in anything like an "objective" sense, so it's tempting to say they're mythically distinct, but as states of consciousness effectively interchangeable. But maybe the GL sequence does indeed have some deeper meaning here -- I dunno.
Anyone mad enough to try and subjectively experience both, from within each native tradition certainly gets my "psychoanalyst on danger money" award for the year. ;-)
Nils Weinander:
> Mashunasan explicitly says that mythical ages are
> incorrect perceptions of states of consciousness, so
> from a mystic PoV this kind of identification is both
> true and utterly false IMO.
That about covers that, then. ;-)
> IIRC the transition to universal nonconsciousness is
> misconceived as the Dogsalu War, i.e. the conflict that
> ended the Creation Cycle (Green Age). Mashunasan does
> not acknowledge any consciousness states that would
> correspond to a blue or black age.
Isn't that transition _from_? (Or do you mean working 'backwards', as a mystical exercise?)
Cheers,
Alex.
--__--__--
End of Glorantha Digest
Powered by hypermail