Support our Kickstarter

Beyond the End of the World: Navigating Our Personal Apocalypse

nova.jpg

 

If we could destroy custom at a blow and see the stars as a child sees them, we should need no other apocalypse. --Gilbert Keith Chesterton

 

Millenarian ideas have been expressed in different ways in diverse settings for many centuries. They have been at the heart of distinctive religious movements emerging in both technologically unsophisticated societies and highly technologised democracies. Notable attempts to explain the emergence of millenarian communities have failed to adequately account for the pervasiveness of apocalyptic ideas in not only religion but other dimensions of life. For instance, millenarian themes can be heard in the speeches of the most powerful politicians on Earth and seen within extremely popular stories and films. It would seem that while at least some people perceive that life can be changed beyond recognition by forces beyond their comprehension, or that the survival of their world is in doubt, millenarian thinking flourishes and finds new forms of expression.

The term apocalypse means different things to different people. To some in might equate with complete destruction of the human world, whether by an act of God or natural disasters. Many link it to themes from dominant religions, where it is thought of as a time when God or his agents will appear on Earth to battle evil forces and lead some to salvation and banish sinners to hell. However, the word actually is rooted in more subtle concepts and means to ‘uncover' or ‘reveal'. When associated with rigid mythologies, created at times of social unrest and tribalistic conflict, apocalypse tends to be clothed in distinctly dualistic ideologies. God and the devil, heaven and hell, believers and non-believers, us and ‘them' and sin and salvation are some key polarities in such a dualistic interpretation of reality. Conversely, if apocalypse is taken to mean uncovering or revealing, things automatically open up and appear more interesting, less dogmatic and perceptions are less likely to lead to catastrophic conflicts.   

Millenarianist visionaries have anticipated quite different things over time. Jesus anticipated that the kingdom of God would be established on Earth but what he believed this would entail is not clear as he tended to speak in vague parables. Cargo cult members hoped that their spiritual ancestors would return, colonialists would be banished and material goods would be given to the faithful. Marian Keech anticipated biblical scale floods and expected her group of devoted followers to be rescued by highly intelligent aliens who would take them to space. José Argüelles expected several things to happen before 2012. Some of his prophecies, including humanity adopting his pseudo-Mayan Dreamspell calendar, have already failed to happen. Apparently speaking for the Mayan Elders, Carlos Barrios anticipated that the massive volcano at Yellowstone National Park in the US would have erupted and brought chaos by now. Had he been vaguer and just predicted that a volcanic eruption would bring widespread chaos he might have gained credibility after Eyjafjallajökull erupted in 2010. 

 

Any shaman, dreamer or meditator would acknowledge that visions are notoriously difficult to pin down and make sense of. A person in a visionary state may see thousands of scenes, people and entities over hours, while also having auditory hallucinations - often in a strange language. After intense visionary journeys most people find it impossible to articulate more than a vague sense of their experience.

It is the nature of the alluring and baffling world of visions that the experiences are ineffable. Readers who have not experienced waking visionary states will no doubt be able to recall times when they, in the space of a few minutes, had numerous intense dreams. In dreams individuals interact with many people and live entirely different lives, but soon after opening their eyes the memories of those worlds are lost. By the time most people get out of the shower their dreams have gone, faster than water down the plughole.

There are good reasons why most people dismiss their dreams or waking visions. One key reason is because most people intuitively realise that they are not to be taken literally. In our individualistic, post Freud age, many people would also assume that the visions relate to their own minds and relationships. Of those people who do dwell on their dreams and visions, most apply the insights to their inner worlds and move on. Most people would acknowledge that strange things do happen to us when we dream or when we consume a vision-inducing substance, but they are able to put such experiences to one side and get on with their lives.

 

The small minority of people who respond to their visions and dreams and establish or become greatly involved with millenarian movements deserve our attention. It is, of course, easy to equate their experiences to mental illness. Like those suffering from schizophrenia, millenarian prophets see and hear things of a strange nature and then attempt to reconstruct the world around their experiences. I would suggest that it is not the experience of visions and intense dreams that make such people unusual but the efforts they make to convince others of the significance of their experience and to reshape the world to fit their altered perceptions.

Every night billions of people dream and every week many millions of people seek out conscious visions by taking drugs, meditating, praying, fasting or drumming. If more than a tiny minority of these people interpreted their visions in a literal manner and were bold and dogmatic enough to encourage others to follow them, millenarian groups would be springing up every minute of every day. Similarly, if everybody took their dreams and visions literally and acted on them, the world would become a huge open air asylum or battleground. Therefore, it is apparent that what defines a prophet is not their visions, which are easy to obtain, but their arrogant assumption that their visions are of unique significance and that they should be followed by others. This may reflect the intensity of certain individuals' visions but it may also be connected with the pushy character of those who claim to be prophets.

As the case of José Argüelles demonstrates, the dogmatism of a prophet can actually have the effect of clouding the perceptions of those who take an interest in their visions, whether serious followers or not. By appropriating aspects of Mayan calendrics in order to create Dreamspell, Dr Argüelles has, in my view, peddled misinformation. Furthermore, by pushing his bizarre prophecies he has no doubt put many intelligent people off exploring the Mayan calendar or 2012 millenarianism. This is unfortunate, particularly for the Maya themselves, but it does at least illuminate a wider issue related to millenarianism. As we are now able to see that Arguelles' Planetary Art Network (PAN) hogged centre-stage and distracted people from understanding Mayan calendrics and culture, we should consider the possibility that something similar has happened throughout history. Millenarian prophets may gain all the attention, with their attractive visions and colourful nature, but this should not distract us from exploring, in a more subtle and intelligent way, realistic possibilities of apocalypse.  

Millenarian prophets are alluring but also ultimately ludicrous figures, particularly after their prophecies fail. As the nature of what they do is claim that certain dramatic things will happen by certain dates, there is always the likelihood that they will be proved wrong and written off as charlatans or mentally ill. Because we now have access to information about a vast number of religions existing historically and globally, it is easy to write off any contemporary millenarian prophet as a deluded fool at best and a self-serving, deceitful manipulator in some cases.

However, I believe that there is a danger of throwing the baby away with the bathwater if we do not examine why particular groups came into being. At the very least, this can help us reflect more sharply on the characteristics of a society in which a group emerged. There is also the possibility that we can understand how elements of leaders' visions of the future may turn out to be true, on some level, when considered carefully.

Cultural evolution is a subtle thing and just because a prophetic vision appears to fail does not mean that it should be dismissed completely. I believe that a series of apocalypses have happened and continue to happen to the human world. They may not have involved the Earth having its poles reversed, burned by a nuclear war, destroyed by a massive volcano or a God returning to Earth to pass judgement on our actions. However, the undeniable fact is that the world in which we live has transformed and continues to transform before our eyes.

The specifics of millenarian prophecies invariably fail but the dynamism of the world which inspires fear, hope and incredible visions, is a constant reality. The dynamism in the world is partly to do with physical changes, for example natural disasters and technological developments - such as the invention of the printing press, aircraft or the internet. However, the dynamism of the world is also generated and maintained by changes within our own minds. In this respect, I believe the movement towards apocalypse has always been driven by and continues to be driven by the evolution of human consciousness.

If we take apocalypse to mean uncovering or revealing, I would speculate that 2012 will be remembered as a significant date. Changes in the external world are happening faster and faster, information about local events can be shared with the world within moments and human beings are more aware of themselves and others than they have ever been. I can be sure that apocalypse will take place in 2012 and beyond as I am aware that it is happening already - and not merely in the imaginations of fanciful millenarianists. It is happening in the minds of people all around the world as they become more conscious of realities and able to share these internationally.

The process of awakening has been happening forever and there have been untold numbers of epiphanies and mini apocalypses in the minds of individuals. Some of these have been woven into myths and religions and had massive impacts on the external world and the lives of billions of people - even if only by the conscious process of rejecting or fighting against a religion or ideology.

If we believe biblical scriptures, it appears as though Jesus anticipated something amazing to happen during or soon after his lifetime. A utopian world overseen by a fair, parental God figure did not manifest while Jesus was alive or immediately after he died. Nevertheless, his execution and stories about his life generated something of a global apocalypse or uncovering. This ultimately led to a strong and widespread perception that the planet is being observed by a divine paternal creator figure. Tragically, however, such is the tendency for humans to look at things in black and white terms that, coupled with the spiritual uncovering catalysed by Christ's death, there was also a narrowing of awareness. Consequently, the dogmatism and attacks on ‘non-believers', encouraged by a narrow and perverted understanding of Jesus' message of unity and forgiveness, promoted the opposite of spiritual revelation.

The notion that stories about the life and death of a man could cause both an apocalypse and a narrowing of human awareness at the same time may seem strange to some. However, the extreme dualism - the infantile black and white thinking of dogmatic ‘followers' who lacked the prophets spiritual insight - ensured that this would be the case in respect to Christianity. Furthermore, the dogmatism that became part and parcel of Christianity had a devastating effect on Christendom's engagement with the ‘primitive' world. At the time when Christian colonialists were making their encroachments on Africa, Asia, Australia and the Americas, the church embodied such an extreme dualistic dogmatism that it is not surprising that those ‘heathens' colonised were treated as atrociously as they were.      

The emergence of other religious movements has been influenced by millenarianism but each can also be viewed as a mini apocalypse as they have resulted in an uncovering or revealing of a larger reality. The impact of each at the time and in subsequent years was primarily limited to those adopting the faiths or those most vociferously opposed to them. However, over time, information about even the smallest and most transitory religion has been circulated and reappraised.

Anthropological fieldworkers, colonialists, missionaries, traders and migrants have historically been the people most responsible for collecting and disseminating information about all sorts of religions and native philosophies. The writing of armchair theorists like James Frazer and mythologists, most notably Joseph Campbell, have helped illustrate the variety of religions and spiritualities. The work of Campbell has articulated how all religions and myths tell a story of essentially the same thing, but through the prism of different cultures. Given that different societies have long been in competition with one another, it is not surprising that religion has been used to demonise neighbours and feared outsiders. More recently, the internet has shared with the world the huge variety of religious ideas humanity has expressed over the millennia.

A cynical and dogmatic atheist would perhaps wish to interject at this stage and say something like "Yes, we can see that humans have created religions for thousands of years and many of these are millenarian in nature. But what have these religions achieved? Where is the apocalypse these people have been longing for?" This, in my view, is a bit like asking "Where has science got us?" or "Where has our conscience and ethics got us?" It is true that utopian societies are the stuff of disturbing films more than lived experience. However, if we are going to trace millenarianism back to Zoroaster and through Judaism, classical Mayan society, Jesus, Islam, Aztec culture, the Hopis and the New Age, we must also reflect on how the world and human consciousness has transformed.

If we understand that apocalypse means to uncover or reveal there have been a huge number of apocalypses since Zoroaster. Developments in science, technology, information exchange, philosophy and travel have come at a greater and greater speed over the millennia. It should not be surprising that quantum leaps in knowledge, experience and philosophy come ever more rapidly - because every new insight leads to others, in a rapid chain reaction. Furthermore, we now have almost seven billion people on the planet - seven times more human lives than 200 years ago. Not only do we have massively more people around but as a species we are better educated than we have ever been and we have an ability to share information that was jealously guarded before. Consequently, our capacity to solve problems and generate new ideas is colossal.

In relation to philosophy, one does not have to have taken a degree in the subject to have incorporated the insights offered by great thinkers. The ideas of philosophers filter out across the world is a way that would have astonished people like Plato, Aristotle and Socrates, who had to debate in the marketplace in order to have any chance of influencing society. A sense of ethics is such a fundamental aspect of contemporary life that notable deviations from morality into bloodbaths and acts of cruelty have become exoticised by the media. Rather than frighten us, the sense of unfathomable otherness we see in psychopathic killers should reassure us that such people are a strange and tiny minority.

We have got to the stage in most countries where each individual has become so precious that a missing child makes the front page of newspapers for years. We have also, thankfully, got to the stage where the deaths of soldiers serving overseas are often the lead story on television news bulletins. It is worth reflecting on the fact that we have made this philosophical shift towards a greater respect for people (and a particular reverence of children) in the context of a population growing rapidly. Our insight into philosophy, aided by religion, has certainly enabled us to move a considerable distance from people being flailed alive or sacrificed to Aztec gods, and from innocent women being tortured, drowned and torched in the name of a charismatic Palestinian carpenter.    

We have further to go before we harness the resources, technology and philosophical wisdom uncovered in our mini apocalypses, to ensure that all people are fed, housed, educated, given medical care and treated with dignity. However, if we take a step back we can see that this is the direction humanity has long been moving in. With the benefit of distance, we have to accept that the myriad of different religions from around the world have helped drive this unstoppable movement towards democracy, ethical standards and freedom. It is also important to recognise that no religion or philosophy has done this singlehandedly or even, in many cases, voluntarily. What has actually happened is that tensions between different explanations of reality and philosophies have pushed forward the consciousness of humanity.

Rather than being catastrophic, these flashpoints of ideological conflict are comparable to the combustion required to propel a car or bus. There may be lots of audible explosions, but ultimately humanity is driven forward and new things are revealed and uncovered at every moment. This is the nature of our ongoing global apocalypse, made up of smaller personal and localised apocalypses.

 

As we get close to the end of the Mayan cycle there are dozens of ideas floating around peoples' minds and the internet about catastrophic or amazing things that may happen. The return of Gods, visitations by aliens, natural disasters, nuclear attacks, the complete collapse of the global economy and the reversal of the polarity of the Earth are among the most commonly expressed fantasies. A rather less concrete but important suggestion by some people is that there will be a shift in human consciousness. This could ultimately mean anything from a movement towards environmentalism, a freeing up of the media in despotic societies, a shift away from racism and sexism or a general improvement in democratic systems. Given that, as has been outlined, human consciousness has always been shifting and appears to be developing faster than ever, this would seem a safe bet.

Those subtle millenarianists who suggest that 2012 is about a shift in human consciousness lack the ludicrous vividness and outrageous creativity of Argüelles. However, at least they will not be shown to be flakes if 2012 is not remembered for utopian communities interacting with Galactic masters. To predict that there will be developments in human consciousness is as safe a bet as predicting that the sun will rise in the morning or that a group of school children will learn and grow. The questions are therefore, how much of a shift will there be and what will change?

It might be nice for those with lots of leisure time to while away the days and months speculating about dramatic things that could happen by the end of 2012. Battles between Gods and devils, alien invasions, gigantic flying Mexican serpents, nuclear exchanges and super volcanoes would be astonishing but also possibly catastrophic for mankind. They may, however, at least satisfy those who are adamant that 2012 heralds the end of the world.

My own vision, of a marked shift in human consciousness, taking us beyond dogma, may not be apparent to everyone by the end of 2012. However, I believe it is inevitable and when it does happen the world will be experienced quite differently. My humble prediction is that, faced with extensive knowledge of different cultures and religions, while forced to live ever closer, human cultures will shed the simplistic dualistic notions that have caused fear and conflict for millennia. Whether by rejecting historically dualistic religions or by re-evaluating each faith and challenging those aspects which tell followers to judge and despise those who hold different views, it seems critical that this shift happens.

Rather than that an idealised parental God coming to defeat an unfathomably evil Satan, perhaps the best we can hope for, in the immediate future, is that revelations of subtle truths shed light on the darkest of cruelties and most twisted of lies. This would lead to the painfully obvious but often ignored fact that people are much more likely to do good acts if treated with respect and dignity. If not trained from a young age to fear and hate those given the erroneous status of 'others', humanity's ability to use resources to feed, house, clothe, educate, heal and entertain itself can only be enhanced. From the most common acts of oppression, such as sexism, racism and domestic abuse, to international relations, the undermining of dualism will always lead to greater harmony and improved communication.

Religious tales hint to us that apocalypse is almost within reach. However, an inordinate obsession with one story prevents us from seeing the bigger picture and truly engaging with the divine. A further irony is that if one dares to take religions less seriously and to recognise that all are merely stories, then personal apocalypse is more likely as our reality dramatically expands. When we accept that all religious narratives, despite their enduring power, are but fairy tales, every story we ever heard suddenly comes to life. Apocalypse does not happen because one particular religious myth comes true, but because we notice the dazzling truth all around us and realise that God, spirit and the unbounded imagination are one and the same.

 

Image courtesy of NASA Goddard Photo and Video.

Comments

Great Article

" [We] realize that God, spirit and the unbounded imagination are one and the same." Great ending. I truly believe we all, through our individual state of being, play a pivotal part in whatever self for-filling prophecy comes to pass. Now is the time to choose love over fear.

Many thanks

Thanks for reading it and I couldn't agree more with you. Love runs through everything - it even runs through fear, so anything is possibile. 

I'd like to communicate with anyone from Reality Sandwich. The best place to catch me is on Twitter, where I am willblackwriter

I'm following up my 2012 and Apocalypse book by a narrative-led book about visions. 

My fantasy is...

      While I agree that what we are witnessing is the accelerating evolution of human consciousness, and that this evolution should be at the heart of any fundamental change narrative regarding our survival, I doubt that—even if this rate of acceleration is taken into account—there will be enough time for the actual resulting change to make the difference needed.

      Therefore, I think that this current rate of acceleration will need to explode into some sort of hyper drive in order for our collective worldview to reach the critical point necessary to fundamentally change the trajectory of our future.

      What could shift this acceleration into hyper drive? What is the common catalyst in human relationships for rapid change?

      Most often it is the shock of catastrophe. Relatively small catastrophes forever alter families. Larger catastrophes alter communities. Even larger ones alter local and national governments, and huge catastrophes alter civilizations as a whole.

      Unless and until such a catastrophe affects us personally, we tend to follow our common daily routine oblivious to the crises befalling others around us.

      My fantasy is that humanity will soon experience a worldwide catastrophe of such immense proportions that it will be felt by us all on a deep personal level; so deeply that a bifurcation will spontaneously occur in our consciousness, perhaps so profound that it will alter our capacity for conscious awareness.

      This catastrophe will humiliate us into a repentant state of heart for all the cruelty humanity has brought to this planet. We will experience a collective Metanoia at the very core of our spirit, which will forever alter our relationship with “other”, whether “other” is a human, an animal, a plant, or a rock.

      My fantasy is that we will soon experience the mother of all catastrophes, to be immediately followed by a spontaneous metanoic bifurcation of human consciousness.

Jose Arguelles

Your comments about Jose Arguelles in this piece are utterly without foundation and in fact are the 'misinformation'. What you are doing here is just rehashing a pop cultural myth about Arguelles' work.

Jose Arguelles never claimed that Dreamspell was the Mayan Calendar. No, not ever. If you can find a single reference written by him, please disprove me. After writing The Mayan Factor in 1987, the book that by the way that established the cultural and mathematical significance of the Mayan Calendar's timing system, as well as the relevance of 2012. Dreamspell was developed as a method of universalizing the code structure of Tzolkin so that a ‘transitional’ calendar could be created that would teach these ideas to anyone using our current calendar system.

Right, or wrong, these ideas deserve to be portrayed as they actually are, rather than caricatured and dismissed in a superficial hack piece. The idea that anyone using the Dreamspell is somehow a ‘follower’ of Arguelles is also offensive and plain wrong.

I wrote ‘The Everything Guide to 2012’ in part to articulate these ideas in a way that does them service and places them within context. Arguelles had many ideas that are philosophically important and culturally insightful. In no way do I agree with all of them, but it is fact that they were groundbreaking and original, unlike this piece.

Another excellent source on the 2012 backstory is John Major Jenkins, ‘The Story of 2012’, for those who choose to be informed, rather than just opinionated. The idea that the Planet Art Network ‘hogged centre-stage and distracted people from understanding Mayan calendrics and culture’ is also false.

The Planet Art Network is a large decentralized federation of people across five continents that use and teach Arguelles’ calendar system. Some of those doing so, it is true, failed to make clear distinctions between Arguelles’ work and the traditional Mayan calendar. That was largely, because they didn’t understand it well enough and misinterpreted Arguelles’ work.

On the other hand, look for example at the work of Eden Sky and www.13moon.com who have consistently being making these distinctions very clearly. Eden Sky has also worked with traditional Mayan elders, promoted their messages and greatly assisted in building real bonds with traditional Mayan culture.

There seems to be a widespread and unspoken assumption in writing about 2012 that it is up for grabs and that vacuous and derivative opinion, rather than research, is somehow good enough. This article joins the large generic garbage pile of such material currently clogging up cyberspace. www.markheley.com

Beyond Dreamspell and back to the apocalypse

Many thanks Leon, interesting and nicely put. Nice to see you here as well Mark, I may come back to some of your points if you need further clarity, but I think you should realise that this feature is an extract taken by Daniel from the conclusion of my 2010 book, Beyond the End of the World - 2012 and Apocalypse. The book was partly influenced by postgraduate research conducted into “Mayaneque” and Mayan calendar-appropriating groups and individuals, such as PAN and Jose. However, it presents a much bigger picture by giving a coherent and admittedly tongue in cheek history of millenarianism, going through Zoroaster, his influence on Judaism, Christ, the development of Christianity, Islam etc etc, stopping off to consider ludicrous things like Webbot and interesting but less well known apocalyptic predictions such as the ones Newton hid from the world and were recently unearthed by a Cambridge doctoral researcher. If you go to the trouble to read some of my book you will see that I conducted anthropological research into PAN. As far as I know I'm the only British anthropologist to have bothered to do this. Why? Because it is regarded as inconsequential as most of Arguelles' more fanciful ideas....tax collectors flanked by minstrels to soften the blow....really...? That seemed credible to you as you travelled around pushing Dreamspell to tents full of tripped out people? So yes Beyond the End of the World includes an educated critique of PAN and Arguelles work. I make no apology for that as it was a good way of introducing the themes of the book in a light-hearted way. (One would have to have no sense of humour and bloated by pomposity to not find much of what was said by Arguelles and his followers hilarious). Either that or an unreflexive follower who is so invested in flawed thinking that they can't see the wood for the trees. But as I say in the book things have, fortunately, moved on and PAN and Dreamspell mean very little to the vast majority of people engaged in debates about 2012. They certainly mean little or nothing to the Maya, from which your religion was appropriated. I'm sure you will come back on here and rant a bit more (and get in some more plugs for your work) but ultimately readers will see that my anthropological and journalistic focus is designed to offer a bigger picture, to illustrate how the 2012 movement has evolved, to focus attention on the Maya, on the realities of life for them and others and on the myriad of different perspectives that exist in relation to 2012 and the much larger tradition of apocalyptic thought. My book isn't entirely tongue in cheek - I take serious things seriously, as you would see if you actually read it. I take the Maya seriously, as my book clearly shows. Another feature is planned for here in the near future based on a chapter from my book about returning the Mayan calendar to the Maya. I don’t think you will like it Mark but one can’t please everybody.

Dreamspell isn't a religion

Dreamspell isn't a religion and it certainly isn't my religion...nor was it 'appropriated'. Your attack is a good example of what happens when opinion is mistaken for argument.

Calling people 'hilarious' and 'ludicrous' without bothering to explain their ideas is hardly anthropology. It's just lazy. and lame. 

There won't be any further posts from me. You can say what you like, it doesn't make you informed or correct. Please don't presume to speak for me or my opinions. It is quite clear you have no idea what I think. 

 

 

 

Nothing special

I think it is very doubtful there is anything special about 2012.

No Apocalypse. No sudden transformation of consciousness. No solar explosion. No... you get the idea.

There is really nothing special about our time.

Yes, transformations are occurring and will occur but they are largely driven by ourselves and on our timetable, not calendars created thousands of years ago or visions of "prophets" today.

Jim Cross

http://www.broadspeculations.com

  I would very much like

  I would very much like to know what pan and the dreamspell movement are if they are not millenarian religious activities. Mark, as I explained this feature is just part of my book and in the book I devoted quite a bit of space articulating arguelles' notions and pan - and putting them in context. And yes, it is good reflexive anthropology to acknowledge that you and others find people or things ludicrous or hilarious. if you haven't noticed a satirical theme running through anthropology since its inception you have either not read much anthropology or you can't see when things are funny. Arguelles was hilarious and to treat his work with anything but humour would be stupid. Just as is so for scientology. But as I say, I really don't want people to think that arguelles and pan are at the heart of 2012 thought, things have moved on and most of arguelles' prophecies have been disconfirmed.

Satirical theme running through anthropology?

What are you talking about?

There are many themes running through anthrology but I don't know of any that I would describe as satirical. Can you be a little more specific?

And I hope you don't think you were studying anthropology when you studied Jose Arguelles.

Jim Cross

http://www.broadspeculations.com

Taking responsibility for our own consciousness

I agree with Jim that transformations are driven by ourselves, but I think you are wrong, Jim, that there is “nothing special about our time”. We are at a point in time with multiple conflicts and struggles throughout the world, and whilst this may not be new, our awareness of them, and our ability to have an impact on political and humanitarian issues has exploded through the development of the internet and communication. Just as our communication evolves so are consciousness and spirituality needs to. Now that we can be scrutinised by the whole world on twitter and facebook etc we need to develop our ideas and opinions. Some say that the natural and man-made disasters, as well as the political upheavals in the Arab world are indicative of a world hurtling towards apocalypse – be it humanity destroying the world, the earth imploding and exploding through natural disasters, a second coming of Jesus, or pyramid-building extra-terrestrial mentors returning to download their knowledge on us. However, I believe that the apocalypse will be seen in our responses to these things. We need to consider apocalypse on a personal level by taking responsibility for our own consciousness and developing our thought. In a rapidly evolving world it is no use to sit back and wait for the end of the world to destroy us or aliens to transform us. We need to be proactive and evolve ourselves. I’ve read Will Black’s book, and I think he would agree with me.

Run up elevators

Thanks for that Pixie, I do agree actually. I guess there are some people in the world who can't recognise the significance of subtle changes, even when those individual changes are like streams which become rivers, which flow into the sea. I have an open mind about 2012 and am not invested in one discourse or religious organisation, which, somewhat ironically, helps me see the potential and reality of apocalypse. While some people wait to be carried up the elevator or escaltor, by magical forces, some of us recognise our own power and run up the stairs or escaltor. People may get left behind, as they always have, but in this age of global information exchange, of the swelling noosphere, there is less need to be. Obviously many people and societies don't have our fortune to be able to access information and communicate freely. I get this across in my book too. In my next feature on here I will contrast the oppression and violence caused by the drug wars of central america with the new age community which plunders selectively from ancient cultures and passes insights off as their own.

Hardly an Apocalypse

"Subtle changes like streams becoming rivers" is hardly an Apocalypse.

I don't doubt many subtle changes are happening but not all of them are positive and there is nothing to guarantee this is going to work out like we all hope.

Jim Cross

http://www.broadspeculations.com

critical mass of consciousness

I don't agree with your statement ""Subtle changes like streams becoming rivers" is hardly an Apocalypse" - a critical mass of people required to instigate dramatic changes develops gradually and over time, so why can't the gradual accumulation of ideas, and the dawning of awareness, contribute to the critical mass of  consciousness required to tip us over the edge into our own personal apocalpyse?

And of course not all the subtle changes are positive, just as, at face value, not all the visions in an ayahuasca trip will be, but over time we come to the realisation that only by reflecting on the whole, positive and negative, can we move forward and develop as indivduals both within a spiritual and a social world.

apocalypse trend and Tech Evolution

I am looking at the Millenium concerns from outside the box. I don't follow any of the beliefs centered around this; though I have taken the time to read about them. I only do so to gain a better understanding of the people around me. These theories and beliefs do have an effect on our culture, where there is access to internet; there are people who are effected by what pours through it. 

In regards to the theorists themselves: They are clearly drawing focus only to research or objects of interrest that further their cause. The predgudiced information is also segmented and incomplete; presenting factoids out of context qiute often to pursude followers tword their agenda. I find this quite dull. Not as in boring; but infentile, even challenged. It gives the appearance of someone who thinks themselves to be gifted because other more challenged people have unfortunately been telling them that they are bright, and to be admired. In my opinion they are not stimulating.

People who follow topics as distraction will consume these spindoctors, and spread their agenda as fast and as efficiantly as gossip. Meaning the few factoids that shodowed some valid evidence will be furthar warped. 

I see that the only value this has in our society is as entertainment, and as having some potential to catch the attention of individuals who will then cut through the BS. People who have a true interrest will study as complete information as they can, and throw out the rest.

You have touched on a topic that exited me quite a lot. I am very interrested in the effect that Technological Advances have made to our thought processes. This is a kind of self induced evolution. We are actually changing the way our minds are able to proccess information and perform; by simply texting. This is a slight change; but it is a significant one. Any small change has the potential for great effect. Human as species are from a species of animal that no longer exists. They are extinct; as one day we will be. We will evolve into something else. It is natural, and our own actions case that evolution. There is no great instantaniuose destruction; but it is a destruction none the less, and a birth of something new. 

If you step back and look at these Millenium theories, they could all be called exagerated interpretations of a solid fact. We exist, and are adapting to our environment; weather it is a natural environment or man made. We are becoming something other than what we are right now. 

  In short: I may not follow your opinions exactly; but I do support your work. It is quite stimulating.

More subtle than nuclear war isn't a bad thing...

When I used the term "more subtle" I mean compared to some of the sort of dramatic doomsday scenarios some people genuinely expect 2012 to be about, things like nuclear war, super volcanoes, alien invasions, the return of Christ and / or Satan, that sort of thing. The sort of changes I allude to are actually happening - heightened consciousness of the impact of our actions and the actions of others as a result, in part due to rapid information exchange, a transcendence of dogma, a greater and greater value placed of education, increased speed of changes in the world and the thinking of individuals, better and braver satire, the expansion of the entheogens available to people and the resultant improvements (on the whole) of creativity, sensitivity and empathy....I could list things all night....these things are real and so is the marked shift from dogmatic, dualistic thinking and religiosity to much more interesting, real and inclusive ethical standards and ideologies as well as scientific insight. These things are important, they are sustaining and supporting life, and the fact that you may dismiss them as inconsequential would actually strengthen my point. This is because these things have become, for many (but not enough) people, taken for granted. However, we have them and are getting more of them because they have been fought for and developed over thousands of years. An unfathomable amount of energy, strength, ingenuity, creativity and love has been locked away for such long that the increasing release of these things over recent decades has brought us to a world of freedom, wonder and possibilities undreamed of by the most optimistic prophets of the past. Yes there are casualties – as there would be if a prison was being blown apart. And if you are tempted to say "if we have these things then why is the world so bad?" let me say that it really isn't. We are able to sustain more lives (and more enriched and enlightened lives) than ever before, despite environmental degradation, wars and the expensive and nauseating roller coaster of the dominant economic system. As an anthropologist I recognise that sitting here in England I'm very lucky and many readers will be sitting in nice, pretty safe and affluent regions as well - and that a great many people are struggling with fears, injustices, hardships and pain that many of us can't honestly imagine. This doesn't mean we are heading for doomsday or that the world is bad, it means the opposite - it means the world has even more ingenuity, strength, creativity and energy to be unleashed. The fall of oppressive regimes in the Arab world is a significant part of this and may be more important than the fall of Rome. So I don't think we have to wait for Jesus, the return of Mayan priests, aliens, global communism, new drugs or 2013 for life to be extraordinary and wonder-filled. It just is. Just as the universe is exploding outwards, so is the stardust inside of us. It’s unstoppable..

Actually not dismissing...

I can agree with a good deal of what you are saying but when you use the word "Apocalypse" it seems you are implying a lot more than "subtle change".

 

I am probably a good older than most people who read and post here. I can remember Left Wing Radicals in the 60's seriously thinking there would be an armed revolution in this country. I can remember people believing Edgar Cayce's prediction of California falling into the sea. I can remember people heading back to the land anticipating the demise of civilization. Of course, none of this happened 40 years ago and nothing similar is likely to happen now.

 

I am not disillusioned about this. On the contrary, I am more optimistic than ever but also more realistic. Many of the truly disillusioned ones - perhaps the ones who expected too much - went on to work on Wall Street and now are Republicans.

We need to maintain a sense of history and perspective and prepare for the long haul. If something happens sooner, so much the better but be prepared that it might not.

 

Jim Cross

http://www.broadspeculations.com

Hi, my email suggests that

Hi, my email suggests that people from here have contacted me directly here but I haven't yet managed to find the messages. Thankyou and sorry for not replying. I'd like to communicate with anyone from Reality Sandwich. The best place to catch me is on Twitter, where I am willblackwriter or my email is willblackwriter at yahoo.com

I'm following up my 2012 and Apocalypse book by a narrative-led book about visions. 

From hippies to yippies to yuppies to???

Some great points there Jim. It was before my time certainly but I have some sense of what you are getting out when you take about 'radicals' going on to become conservatives. A classic case in point is Jerry Rubin, who as you know, was involved with radical politics and got a lot of media attention in the 60s, went to prison as one of the Chicago Eight and subsequently became a businessman, having the word Yuppie applied to him (perhaps even invented for him?). So yes, I agree that early radicalism, especially when grounded in ego driven individualism, often turns into tedious individualistic capitalism. In fact those fighting and those trying to maintain the status quo are from the same, rather privileged background, I don't know if you've read my book that this feature is extracted from but I do go into this quite a lot...how New Age can be seen a echoing capitalist values, how events like Glastonbury are massive, if quirky, markets where even drug dealers can be viewed (by me at least) as shamanic grocers or comparable to traders in bright jackets on the trading floor of stock exchanges. Nevertheless, none of this bothers me as it doesn’t undermine the overarching desire to improve life because some people who initially drop out often join the herd again. It's not new, it's a process I've sometimes called the Wordsworth effect. The reason it doesn't bother me is because radical shifts in our direction need the energy of youth who are going to fight for things that seem impossible. It also needs the wisdom of experience and a historical awareness, which we do have too – as you can vouch for. Using your example of the 60s and radicalism Jim, let's have a think about the fact that 'acid victims' from the 60s and 70s who went on to play a major role in shaping modern communication and laying the foundations for global protests beyond anything seen in the history of the world. I'm sure Daniel and others here know much more about this than me but pioneers of IT (including Rubin) and the internet were often people who had been ‘hippies’ and used things like LSD, mescaline, DMT and mushrooms. I have sane friends in IT who have suggested that entities accessible on tryptamines were instrumental in humanity creating the internet and modern computer systems. Whether that is true or not it has to be acknowledged that those 60s radicals anticipating various forms of imminent transformation of the world could not have predicted that their expanding creativity could have led to the most astonishing revelation machine, a global communication network of computers and phones enabling something that has to be regarded as an expanding shared apocalypse of truth and freedom, whether we ultimately desire it or not. Consciousness expansion isn’t always enjoyable is it? Obviously it comes back to what we mean by apocalypse, which is why I wrote the book as I did. I agree with you that we have to put everything in context, which is what my book does. But that doesn't lead me to conclude that, as there's always been people trying to change things, anything going on now is not especially significant. The eternal NOW and the energies being expressed in the now, on the edge of the world, are always significant. It just happens that NOW we have amassed the resources, abilities and knowledge to reconstruct the world, good or bad, in a way unimaginable in the past. This is why I agree with Pixie when she suggests that individual agency and group efforts are key.

Debunking the Dreamspell Agenda, Carnival 2012

Jonathan Zap of zaporacle.com

Thanks for writing this Will.

I found it to be supreme irony that Mark, in defense of Dreamspell, actually referenced my friend and colleague, John Major Jenkin's book The 2012 Story which thoroughly exposes Jose's intentional obfuscation of Dreamspell's non relation to the Mayan calendar. It was John's writings on the Dreamspell Agenda that got Jose to backpedal and clarify the difference as if he always had, which he most certainly had not. I discuss this in depth in http://www.zaporacle.com/carnival-2012-a-psychological-study-of-the-2012...

Here's an excerpt (the parenthetical citations are page numbers in The 2012 Story, so one wonders what Mark read or might have been smoking when he read that book):

José’s next most famous contribution to Maya misinformation was his Dreamspell kit, a kind of board game or teaching tool that included a game board and a dial for calculating your “galactic signature.” (85) The kit was printed in China and was in frequent use in New Age circles throughout the Nineties and early post-millennium years. The supposedly Mayan day count promoted by José in both his book The Mayan Factor, and in Dreamspell, was completely out of synch with the authentic Mayan day count still in use to the present day. The Dreamspell system also fails to adjust for leap years which means it does not even have internal consistency (104). Deceptively, the early Dreamspell literature labeled it as the “Maya calendar” (107).

In the many encounters I’ve had over the years with Dreamspell practitioners, not one of them had any awareness that they were following a system completely out of synch with the authentic Mayan calendar. When I would try to inform them of this fact, some people were receptive, while others reacted with incredulity, anger and haughty contempt.

In late 1995 John posted “The Key to the Dreamspell Agenda” on his website, a document that rigorously elaborated the many flaws and deceptions of the Dreamspell system and José’s supposedly “Maya Calendar.” In response to the public challenge, “The spin doctors stepped in pretty quickly, of course, and the Dreamspell count was soon identified as the preferable ‘Wizard Count’ or ‘Galactic Count’” (108). In later writings, José makes the distinction between his Wizard Count and the Maya calendar as if he had never said otherwise, and without the slightest acknowledgment of the earlier deception or egregious error. (107). Many Dreamspell followers never noticed the new qualifiers, and remain in ignorance that the calendar they are following is not Mayan.

Dispelling Dreamspell and getting back to reality

Many thanks for reading it Jonathan and good to see you here. I'm in good company. Mark’s admonishments for me using terms like ludicrous and hilarious seem themselves ridiculous and laughable when he does such a good job of reinforcing the fact that Dreamspell is muddled and that PAN people do little more than spread misinformation and fantasy. To use a credible scholar like John Major Jenkins to hide behind is pitiful enough but to chose one who has successfully shown up the flaws in Dreamspell is just priceless.

 

It’s a good example though of how people who are caught up in a religion or intractable ideologies are EXACTLY the wrong people to be writing about a movement. It reminds me of those awful little books on Christianity or cults pushed on the public at shopping malls. PAN has certianly become the poor mans' Scientology.

 

Another irony is that my book is intended to help people get beyond Dreamspell and the most fanciful and superficial ideas about 2012, yet here we find ourselves having to rearticulate arguments made expertly many years ago by pioneers like John Major Jenkins. My postgraduate research gave a lot of attention to PAN and Dreamspell but they were already fading a decade ago. The main reason I devoted some of my book to showing the weakness of Dreamspell, ludicrousness of PAN and hilarious pomposity of Argüelles and PAN activists is that it shows quite clearly how millenarian movements can be created, expand, become ridiculed and then disintegrate (like Pizza in the rain) rapidly, in our era of the internet and armchair prophets.

 

Mark is no doubt is angry with what I’ve written but, to be honest, PAN should be flattered I’ve devoted as many words to them as I have. The organisation isn’t interesting for being held together by truth but because it is held together by misappropriated ideas, fantasy and downright shame-faced deciet. It reminds me of that Aesop’s fable about the birds' beauty contest. The plain jackdaw knows it can’t win so attaches feathers from other, more spectacular birds, to itself. The other birds see their own feathers and take them back and the jackdaw is revealed to be a dull, ugly, fake and cheat.

 

I would urge anyone who has wasted any of their life taking PAN, Argüelles and Dreamspell seriously, to spend the same amount of time looking into the realities of Mayan life (both historically and now) and the extremely difficult circumstances many people in Central America face. I appreciate it’s hard for people like Mark, who have invested so heavily into weaving yoghurt, to accept their errors, laugh at themselves and move on to see a bigger picture. But it’s worth a try.

-

The only thing of note about this article is the arrogance of the author.

Have you actually read the book?

I suspect, like Dreamspell pusher Mark, you haven't read the book my feature is extracted from. If you had you would realise that I only offer some tentative ideas about what the future may bring at the end. For the rest of it I'm only in there as a reflexive observer, I'm certainly not pushing a religious ideology. Most of my book is an analysis of apocalyptic ideas through history, including the 2012 'movements'.

 

Rather than arrogantly pushing religious ideologies, my work raises reasonable questions about ideologies imposed on societies by people who present themselves as prophets, from the famous, like Jesus and Muhammad, to less well known ones like Arguelles (whose prophecies have failed already).

 

My book also echoes the work of fellow anthropologists and other experts who have attempted to reclaim the Mayan calendar for the Maya. But it's far from the case of an anthropologist just imposing meaning on religious ideas. If you take a look at the book you will see that I have slated conservative anthropologists as much as I have New Age yoghurt weavers (like those who push Dreamspell). I would urge you to take a read of the whole book. Anyone but an intransigent Arguelles follower should get a lot of enjoyment from it.

spam above?

I'd like to communicate with anyone from Reality Sandwich. The best place to catch me is on Twitter, where I am willblackwriter

I'm following up my 2012 and Apocalypse book by a narrative-led book about visions. 

The comodification of reality

I find it hilarious that a feature based on my book, in which I talk about the comodification of spirituality, shamanism and culture is being spammed. As much as I like to see comments, would it be possible to remove these please? Will

Who's the arrogant one?

Ada, in defence of Will this feature is taken from the conclusion of his book, and if you'd read it you would see that it is really unfair to call Will arrogant. The main body of the book is so humble in examining multiple perspectives and aspects of millenarianism, through the eyes of different religious and cultural groups, that for most of it you are held in suspense, wondering what Will's opinion is - it is nice to get a glimpse of that in the conclusion. The 2012 debate is suffocated by ideology pushers on an ego trip. Will's book moves it away from this to untangle the fact from the fiction, and to pitch different ideas and beliefs against each other in a neutral setting. Indeed, it is the arrogance of people like Mark that means we need a book like Will's.

I'd say I agreed with the

I'd say I agreed with the general gist of the article, I think that a vision can bring insight or a sense of unveiling to one person and yet to someone else it could cloud or obscure their outlook if taken too literally or followed too dogmatically. What I reacted to was the implication that Jose Arguelles was in some sense 'pushy' because I didn't see him that way at all. And then we had to listen to him being insulted again and again in the comments as well, which considering he died only recently seemed plain impolite.

There were passages in the article that I found quite stupid and overly generalized for instance  'if everybody took their dreams and visions literally and acted on them, the world would become a huge open air asylum or battleground' - what kind of dreams and visions does the author have in mind here? One could argue that it is by not being brave enough to act authenticallyand follow one's dreams that has made us act robotically in such a collectively destructive way. 

Also the author says - 'Therefore, it is apparent that what defines a prophet is not their visions, which are easy to obtain, but their arrogant assumption that their visions are of unique significance and that they should be followed by others.' I think there is some confusion here about the distinction between a prophet and a visionary. I do not believe anyone's prophecies but I'm definetly interested in visions that to me seem plausible, almost logical, that ring true to me, and I definetly appreciate people like Jose, Terence Mckenna and Teilhard de Chardin who spread and share these visions, I don't see it like they are''pushing' them on anyone at all. But perhaps Jose presented his visions too much as prophesies? - maybe that is a valid critisism. But the author says the visions are 'easy to obtain' - how arrogant is that??

Personally, for me regarding 2012 I don't feel like I 'follow' anyone or any ideas but I do feel overloaded with information about it all. I'm really just nostalgic for the mystical, the sense that everything just seeks to connect with everything else and thats what I want. I know the way forward for me is really to withdraw backwards or inwards into that personal unveiling.

 

Personal Veil

The Apocalypse occurs when I finally wake up and accept the Truth of the following Irrefragable equation: I = God. That is, there is Only One I, and that I - the I that I use to write this line, read this line, and be this line of text - is the same I that has been used and loved and hated and rejected by every person and every creature that has ever existed, exists now, and will exist in the evolutionary trajectory of the Universe. The Apocalypse is very personal. To wit, only I Lift the Veil from My Own Eyes and "see" that it is Me - the Self - that is the Creator and the Creation all rolled into One.

Personal apocalypse to union with all that is, was & will be

Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;}

 

Thanks for that Theoretician, I'd like to hear more about your perspective on that and how you developed your insights.

 

You've hit upon something that continues to leave me feeling wonder - that paradox between following the individual path towards personal apocalypse or revelation and transcending the imagined self in order to merge with all there is, was, will be and can be imagined. 

 

Perhaps a good analogy is how particle physics can help up understand the structure and trajectory, or anatomy and physiology of the cosmos? As William Blake said:

 

 

"To see a world in a grain of sand and heaven in a wild flower,

hold infinity in the palm of your hand and eternity in an hour."

 

Thanks Pixie for understanding my book and articulating it for people who want to pass judgment without bothering to read it. It is disappointing that PAN and Dreamspell enthusiasts are in still in denial about the misinformation that has been peddled or their hunger for authority. It's amazing to me that a few people are still buying into Dreamspell when so many experts have highlighted its flaws and deceits time and time again.   

 

The fact that PAN people shy away from engaging in this debate here is extremely revealing. PAN people, like Mark, seemed very happy to prattle on about Dreamspell for interminable periods of time when 2012 millenarianism was novel to most people. Now that Dreamspell has been revealed to be misappropriated hokum and more impartial and better qualified people that PAN people have engaged in debate about 2012 & Mayan calendrics they don't seem so keen to defend their views, ideologies and distortions.

 

It’s not unlike the way Scientology PR people are on Twitter all day long churning out crap but when people ask them questions they ignore it. I must have asked the 100 questions in the few months I’ve been in Twitter and they have ignored every single one.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Introduction

Will: "I'd like to hear more about your perspective on that and how you developed your insights."

 

Well, sure, but first let me introduce myself by my given name: Erik. Much of what I am about to write may sound unlikely, impossible, unreasonable, or unbelievable, but oh well, so it goes.

I have been a scientist for over 20 years - undergrad, Ph.D., postdoc, and now assistant professor at a nationally recognized medical university.  I have published 17 peer-reviewed publications and my research is funded by the NIH.  I have experience with yeast, fly, and mammalian cell systems and am proficient in biochemistry, cell biology, molecular biology, genetics, developmental biology, genomics, and bioinformatics.

I have worked for the last seven years - reading over 550 nonfiction works by the most famous names in the history of Humankind and crafting a reified, heuristic model undergirding an irreducible theory of everything.  I started building models to understand results I got working with RNA metabolic pathways and then applied these models to major unsolved problems in physics, cosmology, linguistics, economics, theology, philosophy, psychology, and biology, among many, many other fields.  In other words, after proving to myself that my model displaced the central dogma in explaining the relationship of RNA, DNA, and protein, I used it to understand and explaineverything else. The theory is incommensurable with the current worldview.  Hence, it is controversial and revolutionary because it challenges ad hoc models in every field.

I have shared my theoretical framework with 30 or more of the great living theoreticians in systems, chaos, complexity, evolutionary, information, and emergence theory - only to have received silence as a response.  I have composed a scientific manuscript and submitted it to many scientific journals, only to have it rejected for non-scientific reasons (read: prejudice).


As I have been unable to falsify the theory, nor have I identified anyone who has been able to falsify it, by all estimations it is the correct and final model of reality.  This theory proves that there is Only One I, and that I is the same I used by everyone.  Indeed, that I = Will and I = Erik reveals the paradox of Only One I.  In this regard, this exchange of symbols between Erik and Will proves that I am communicating through Myself (the symbols themselves) with My Self.  Just like the great mystics have said, "I am the Truth."  Another way of saying this would be "Everything is Me."  Theory validates these claims. 

I, Theoretician, am as skeptical as the Reader of the Theory.  I know this as I am Theory and Theoretician in One, Irreducible.  I know and understand this skepticism as there is Only One I, and that I is God - I am the skeptic, the cynic, the critic, and the disbeliever (as well as the believer and agnostic) all rolled into One.

Hope this addresses the request for more information.

Nope. Truth. The problem

Nope. Truth. The problem is that so many wanna-bes and charlatans have made the same pronouncement. So, eventually, when someone with the correct model does come forward, the burden of proof is very heavy.

The burden of proof

Well, I would still like to hear more about it when you get a chance.Why not put it in a book? I take your point about the difficulty of getting people to believe anything at all when the cultural landscape is littered with the empty lies of charlatans and the awful impact of the grandiose delusions of plastic prophets. I think this is why so many of us took objection to the Dreamspell movement. It purported to be the Mayan calendar but was shown to be flawed, so then many intelligent people disregard the contributions of the Maya.

Thanks for the response.

Thanks for the response. I've already written the book. Being a career scientist and burgeoning theoretician, I thought that might carry some clout in the publishing industry. Ho boy, was I wrong. I spent about 6 years researching for the book. I spent about 1 year writing it. I spent another 6 months composing and sending a book proposal to the majors in non-fiction and science (University presses especially). I spent another 6 months revising the proposal and sending it to ~200 literary agents. After all that and no bites, I sat back and started paring it down to the scientific aspects. I spent 3 months on this and then submitted a manuscript to peer-reviewed journals. Just today I heard back from the New Journal of Physics that they would have nothing to do with it. So it goes. My backup plan is, indeed, a book; likely self-publishing. But if I can get it through the peer review process and publish at least some of the theory in a scientific journal, this gives it a stamp of approval lacking from other types of publication (no disrespect meant here, just the inherent bias of scientists.) {By the way, I'd be happy to share a older version of the theoretical framework should you be interested. I'm not in the business of advertising, promotion, or salesmanship. I have only one goal, and that is World Peace.} The Truth of the matter is that I know how I work - I know that I am the Theory rejecting Myself; My Evolutionary History shows that the way I expand knowledge systems is by rejecting any and all new ideas prior to accepting them - this actually is theoretically modeled by Universal expansion. So, I was those charlatans and plastic prophets as much as I am them now. I was the Mayan calendar maker and the entire Mayan civilization. I always disregard the important contributions I makes; this is the paradox of One I. In this regard, the ultimate theory models Me and rejecting My Self until the End of Time, where/when (these concepts lose meaning) I collapse Everything back into Me. I don't have to take My Word for it. Indeed, it is Only I who decides what to accept or reject. This is the Power of being God. As My Brother is Me, it has been nice chatting with My Self.

Every single dream and vision underneath the stars

Hi, sorry, I didn't spot your fuller response there, thanks for saying so much more - it makes a real difference.

Firstly, I should say that my book from which the extract is taken for this feature came out before Jose's passing. To disregard flaws in his ideologies though when there is still an incredible amount of misinformation around about 2012 & the Maya would be wrong. Jose is not the centre of debates about 2012 but he has had an inordinate influence on the thinking of too many.

In terms of prophets and visionaries, Jose shamelessly called himself a prophet and even suggested he was the reincarnation of a Mayan priest and born with the unique ability to tell the world about the Mayan calendar (ignoring the living Maya and experts on Mayan culture in doing so).

Unfortunately he didn't actually tell the world about the Mayan calendar - he told people about Dreamspell - and as Jonathan says above he made no effort until pushed to make distinctions between Dreamspell and the Mayan calendar, from which most of it was appropriated.

Anyone can have a vision - yes... any fool can write down their dream, smoke some DMT, eat some acid, sniff some ketamine can they not? Does it follow that their vision should be something that has an influence on how other people live their lives? No. Why? Because if everyone actually followed their own individual visions, impulses, intuitions and desires we would all clash horribly all the time.

An extreme example of this is on psychiatric wards - where I have worked and studied. There may be 20 people with paranoid schizophrenia all coming into conflict as a result of their own strong ideas about things. Most of their dirtorted ideas have SOME basis in reality but it's primarily about them and their shattered psyches and fears. Their voices and visual hallucinations aren't something we should build socieities around. It would be a recipe for disaster. They are things we should understand and use to help them grow as people.

Yes, religious visions are generally quite different but as everyones slant on things varies, if everyone decided their dreams and visions should shape reality for others, we would be living in a narcissistic, individualistic hell.

You say -'Jose is not the

You say -'Jose is not the centre of debates about 2012 but he has had an inordinate influence on the thinking of too many.' I'm really curious to know what you think the negative influence of Jose Arguelles is? It seems to me one of your main concerns is the imagined 'appropriation' of the Mayan Calendar by Dreamspell. Yet I'm sure that anyone with any interest in the Mayan Calendar could very soon, and with a minimum of research, find out the difference between the two. - 'Dreamspell is specifically aimed at being a transitional calendar from the apparent disharmony of the Gregorian calendar to something better. It is proposing itself as a new, alternative calendar system, not the re-establishment of an ancient one.' http://www.netplaces.com/guide-to-2012/dreamspell-and-the-thirteen-moon-... Do you really regard it as such a bad thing for there to many people following an alternative calendar, or gathering together to honour sacred sites, as happened during the Harmonic Convergence, or discussing telepathy and evolution, all of those things that Arguelles followers presumably do? Maybe you just cringe at the thought of there being too many ardent, gullable, niave, deluded, narcisstic, meglomaniac, followers kidding themselves that they can change the world using wishful thinking or something? Personally I just think he came up with some interesting memes worth spreading. I'm really curious to know what exactly you object to about him. Regarding Jose suggesting that he was the reincarnation of a Mayan priest, I can imagine that a lot of people would find this ludicrous, but I'm willing to keep an open mind about it. Stan Grof's research into transpersonal experiences has convinced me enough to be open to the possibility that people can access information from past lifes by extrasensory means, I don't have too much of a problem with the idea. Daniel Pinchbeck also recounted his experience of accessing information from Quetzalcoatl, I don't think there's anything wrong about talking about these experiences and I don't feel like Daniel pushes his dogma on anyone or anything and neither do I think did Jose. I don't quite understand your argument regarding dreams and visions, are you saying we should all keep quiet about these personal experiences?. You say - 'if everyone decided their dreams and visions should shape reality for others, we would be living in a narcissistic, individualistic hell.' and yet you have no problem with repeating Blake's poetic vision and seem pleasantly influenced by it - 'To see a world in a grain of sand and heaven in a wild flower, hold infinity in the palm of your hand and eternity in an hour." Obviously no-one is going to take his poetic vision literally and expect to gaze into his grain of sand as if it were some kind of Google Earth, I think visions and dreams are like metaphors and the individual can choose how to interprete them and which ones to be influenced by, I see no harm in people sharing their experiences, the chances are that only a handful of people will be interested anyway.

magic and nothing

Hi Daruma, isn't it curious that those who want to criticise have the least to say and run off with their tail between their legs as soon as people explain flaws in their thinking? Are you a Dreamspell follower by any chance? The only negativity I have had about my book is from Dreamspell and Scientology people. This makes me think I've done a pretty good job. But no, my book isn't designed to be a magic spell. It's a well-researched work of anthropology and journalism, designed to get the biggest picture as possible across in the clearest language I could. If you want pseduo mysticism, crystal skulls, zombies or tax collectors flanked by minstrels I would suggest you stick with people like Jose Arguelles and any of the flakes churning out fantasy books.

Nostalgia

Ada - why be nostalgic for the mystical? If a child can see wonder in everything then so can we if we really open our eyes. You've only got to look at people like Mike Scott to know that mysticism is alive and well. Maybe that's our apocalypse - opening our eyes and realising that the spirituality and wonder we have been chasing has been in front of us all along, in the relationships we have with other and with nature.

sense of wonder

Hi roopixie, I'm afraid I'm hardly getting that experience though, I'm guessing that addiction to thinking gets in the way, and I can always find some excuse not to meditate. I was listening to Terence Mckenna talk about 'Nature becoming transparent to it's intention to communicate' and wishing I could invoke the presence of that sense wonder.

Unity and science

Some interesting points coming through, I'm so glad to have had the chance to have the conclusion of my book featured here and the chance to interact with so many interesting people. Erik, your perspective seem perfectly logical to me. There is only one, whether we are looking through the microscope or telescope of science, or the enchanted sparkling eyes of the mystic. So I think a lot of people would agree with your general points, even if they didn't have your extensive scientific education and experience. However, getting articles published in peer reviewed scientfic journals is hard enough but, as a sole author trying to unify religion and science (if this is what you are doing), it may be a struggle sadly. Have you considered any more radical scientific journals or social science publication - or even publishing it online in order to get discussion going? I'm extremely curious now so I would love to take a look if possible. I'm sure there are many people around this site who have run into similar (apparent) brick walls as you have. One person who springs to mind who I would rate as a respected medical scientist (a toxicologist) and insightful researcher into the Maya, 2012 and mysticism is Carl Calleman. It may be you know him already but if not it may be well worth speaking to him as I'm sure he would have empathy for your predicament.

Thanks for the response,

Thanks for the response, Will. I offer my work for your perusal, should you be so inclined. I posted my email below. Perhaps I should contact Calleman, but I'll be honest, my theoretical framework is a doozy. The Greeks called it by a different word: Apocalypse.

Theoretician

 

Hello, I can't remember if I offered my email address before but it would be good to see some of what you've writter. I'm willblackwriter@yahoo.com

 

Did you get in touch with Carl Calleman?

Best wishes, Will

 

Max

I met Max the crystal skull at a weekend conference, with all sorts of seminars.I got to spend five minutes with max, so I meditated with the skull.I felt charged after the session.After all it was a big crystal.I have been reading the comments on here, and I don't understand all the big hype about the so-called hype.I can't see how Jose A, caused any problem, other then to attempt to raise awareness, regardless if he was a bit hyped beyond the actual Mayan version, or versions.I am not versed in the Mayan calender, other then I know about the great cycle, ect. However other then people like the writer of this article, and the other guy that makes a fuss about Jose, I can't see what they have to offer, other then their own hyped versions of the hype.Ok so, if i did read everything Jose wrote, and then read the other versions, would I be any closer to the actual thing it points to? I could read Black's book, but if I don't have a degree in anthropology and I haven't really read that much about Jose, and I meditated on a crystal skull called Max, and I liked Terence Mckenna because he had a interesting way of speaking, about language, and well, Terence and Jose both did not stay around for the 2012 date, I guess I am late for a very important date. To quote the rabbit.

The straight story

Actually, one of the key criticisms to Jose's work - not just by myself and Jonathan (who has researched this all for many years and writes really clearly) is that he deliberately caused confusion & spread misinformation, while pretending to have scientific credentials. He had no scientific credentials. He taught art history for a short time. I'm both a journalist and anthropologist and some of my book actually criticises anthropologists for writing in a way that is more about academic mutual masturbation than communicating key things about culture to societies. Some colleagues have taken issue with this but what the hell. You certainly don't need a degree in anthropology to understand my book. I'm actually one of the 2012 writers who is making an effort to demystify the Maya, the calendar, 2012 and cults like PAN. My book may be rather sardonic and tongue in cheek at times, I admit, but a lot more people are getting enjoyment out of that than those feeling upself. As I said it primarily Dreamspell people who are most upset by it. But that's just because their system was misappropriated and is deeply flawed. As I've said a couple of time in this blog, I think people have dwelled on Arguelles and Dreamspell for far too long. Let's get back to the Maya, reality and integrity.

what hyped version?

It's unfair of you to say that Black offers nothing but  his "own hyped versions of the hype." Black's book is an exercise in deconstructing the hype around 2012, and disentangleing the facts from the fiction. After reading the whole book it is clear that Black is trying to prevent his own personal views on the subject from coming through. His main message seems to be 'here are the facts, now make up your own mind', rather than 'this is my view, this is right, now get all excited about me'.

integrity

The nitty gritty.I don't know, I did not dwell on Dreamspell, but I did have that real cool book Jose made back in the 80's.I admit that all I did mostly was look at the drawings.Having said that, I think that the fuss is mostly about followers of Jose.Do you know the way to Jose? Why did he say he was a scientist? Who knows? Does it really matter? As Jose is Jose, only he can know why he added that.Are we saying that his followers have not integrity because they looked passed his flaws? Are we saying that they were in fact too dazzled by him to see that he was willing to misrepresent some part of his mission?When we speak of integrity, are we thinking of figures like Jose, who stepped on stepping stones of Mayan mystery, in order to bring some awareness of the cycles of time, in context with all the actual flux of linear reality and what revolves around time.Or does time revolve in a way that only the Mayans groked?Is this what integrity is? Meanwhile 2012 is just around the corner.Do we have time to get back to integrity? Intergral intergalactic, interdimensional, all these huge contexts, we are speaking of, and we are still having to make much on that Jose crowd.I don't know, but we could pick another figure that has faded into the maze of history.Speaking of integrity, where does the real person Jose begin, and the image people have of him end?The same for Aleister Crowley, Tim Leary, Philip K. Dick, and lately Terence Mckenna.We speak of Mayan integrity, we speak of time, and we aim for some better vision beyond this small time where we came from, the nitty gritty, the nit picky, the blame that goes around in circles biting it own tail.If I had the luxury to bring up anthropologists for a higher reality check, then does that not also count for scientists? We become the thing that we have been called, the identity, the title, the credential, at what point in the timing of things do we step beyond all that? So I also am an anthropologist, a scientist, but not by the fixed notion of time that holds all that in some kind of static version.The Mayan version then, stands outside of these fixed identities.Popes and Kings, CEO's and politicians, and last but not least philosophers and poets.

unifying theories

Erik, peer-review is sadly the opponent to paradigm-shift. If you don't mind, what's your surname so I can have a look at some of your stuff? I'm in a related field, and I can't help but wonder whether just as our mitochondria, which after all may once have been free-living entities, may consider themselves as understanding that the cell they inhibit is all there is, being unable to conceive that that cell alone is rather insignificant and acquires its worth as part of the much greater tissue/organ/body, so we as humans believe that reality exists only within the confines of our universe, and yet our universe may be equivalent to a cell - insignificant alone but part of something much, much greater that we are far too small to ever be able to see or imagine. If this is the case, perhaps then God tries to communicate this to us. Surely the perfect representation of this could be the Ayahuasca snake, with every scale a beautiful universe, but part of something much greater.

Hi roopixie2012, nice to

Hi roopixie2012, nice to meet Me again for the first time all over again! *flashes a peace sign across the screen* Well, I'd rather not post my surname here; however, I would be more than happy to introduce myself more fully in a more private manner; I can be reached at theoretician@ymail.com. I'd be interested to hear about your field of work and I could tell you more about my science and theoretical work, should you be so inclined. Your analogy with the Universe being equivalent to a cell is a good one. The Truth is that the first-person perspective, that is, "I," is equivalent with the Universe. This can be written as I = Universe, or can be said as, “I am the Universe.” Either way, it is the same. This is the paradox of Only One I, as every single first-person perspective is My Perspective, and Everyone is Me. It has been a stultifying assumption to think that when the scientist, philosopher, or theologian speaks or writes of “I,” that is, the Self, that it ends at the tip of the fingers or toes, or the crest of the head. Not so. Theory proves that I = God. And, as such, I am Everywhere and Everything (and all of the other Divine characteristics as well).

Wild Thing...

I'm temped to say that you make my heart sing but I expect you get that all the time. I agree Jose wasn't without his redeeming qualities. If you real my book you'll that I found him very entertaining. He certainly had charisma and some extraordinary ideas - which is exactly what one wants from a prophet. He did his bit and things have move on since the hayday of PAN and Dreamspell. Luckily a broader range of people have been looking into 2012 and writing and speaking about it. For quite a long time hardly any anthropologists took any interest in the Mayan calendar but they have done more so in recent years. Plus twitter etc allow every fantasy you can imagine to be articulated and retweeted. It's going to be a fascinating year.

Tree of knowledge

www.caseygreenling.com Great excerpt. I was wondering if you wrote anything in the book or reviewed any of Terence Mckenna's Time wave zero thoeries or speculations. There is a great 8 part series called "Tree of Knowledge" recorded in Boulder in 1992, which towards the end he goes into his innerstanding of Novelty' (complexity) and the shift in consciousness that you speak about. I think you will enjoy it. Thanks~ Theoretician- self publishing is a great way to go, and have an easy and fun format to share your work!

Time wave, Terence, 2012, Webbot, Hinduism etc etc etc

Good to hear from you Casey, thanks for reading it. When completing my book I took the decision to not go over Terence's Time Wave stuff. The main reasons were it has already been covered well by others and I wanted my book to be different from anything else written about 2012, and also I wanted to get the focus back onto the Maya and away from alluring New Age theorists. There's a lot of spam being peddled on twitter and elsewhere linking Time Wave, the Mayan calendar and Webbot. I devoted a small section articulating how unrelated thinngs, such as Hinduism, Webbot, the Mayan calendar etc are often misrepresented and blended together in order to add fuel to the fire of apocalyptic fervour. As Reality Sandwich readers would know, those attempting to blend so many things together in order to express certainty about doomsday events generally have only a superficial knolwedge of the religions and systems they are bundling together. Terence was an extremely interesting man and remains a fasciniating spirit. I find many of his other ideas, particularly about entheogenic mushrooms and language, much more fascinating than Timewave.

Beyond the Calander ... who was there at day one

Even the timing of the atom is ultimately in flux in relation to infinity ... what to speak of the planets {astrology} ... what does one really have beyond their internal visionary experience to tune into the underlying rhythms of infinite interaction. Many cultures shared in collective vision, mythology .. not as fiction per-se, but as imagination in tune with underlying principle beyond the limitations of reductionism... { psychedlia = expansionism}... Of course there will always be the distinction between entheogenic vision and charlatan fancy ... but such will never really be determined by relative comparison alone. There will never really be conformational reason and rationale beyond intuition. For Einstein the "formula" of relativity only but confirmed his living imaginations "riding on a light beam" ... for Mozart to awake one night with a living symphony playing in his head is likely more real than any time and space interpretational performance later on down the time and space continuum . Just a general caution not to get caught up in discounting of visionary reality in the name of mere "afterthought" ... allowing the essence of things to exist beyond recognition. "Wonder is what Mystery would do if it was conscious" ... "Wandering is for every other possibility" Pippalayana Muni