I have ever sensed Power and Mystery, Set and Nuit, and not a vast array of self created beings, just Set within the Matrix of Nuit. In my noetic experience, it is easy for me to understand Nuit, 'Mother of the Gods', the Matrix which holds all together and makes possible the Magical Link. And of course, I've had noetic experience of Set, the Power which 'gives life'. But I've not had noetic experiences of Horus, Thoth or Isis, for instance. I'm tempted to think that I 'become' as Horus, Thoth or Isis as I express my own divinity. That would place these entities in the realm of 'archetype'. It is the clearest I can figure at this time.

In 'Egyptian Mystics', Moustafa Gadalla presents a different view. He explains how the Egyptian system never died, as so many think, that it has been a continuous integrated metaphysical viewpoint through out the centuries. But he gives a different view of Power. He thinks it is all one eternal, lifegiving source, which changes face by changing role. It is a sort of 'monotheism', the 'Unity of Multiplicity', he calls it. (Of course, he takes the later Egyptian view, which demonizes Set, but I'll address that later.)

'One eternal, lifegiving source', or as he says, "primeval, cosmic, creative force", which he expresses as Ra, "The One Joined Together, Who comes Out of His Own Members" (page 57) Well, that's one frame of thought. I've not had noetic experiences of any but Nuit and Set. My best understanding is that if the others have an independent existence and are more than 'archetypes', they came into being at humanity's bequest, 'because they were needed', and in that manner, created by humans to be energized entities in their own right.

But I could be wrong. I am not dogmatic. That to me is the surest way to seal off any possible new epiphanies that might give a clearer vision. And ever I ask myself, what if EVERYTHING that I sense about these aspects, even the Power and the Mystery, are solely things 'created in my own head'? What if that is so? I think then, we have archetypes. And those archetypes alone can give meaning to people's lives, help them make sense of the metaphysical world, their own inner world and the world around them.

And yet I've had these odd experiences, which some call 'unverified personal gnosis'. These noetic experiences that come to us, does it change the magic of them even if, say, they were created alone in our psyche? I strive not to be dogmatic about my experiences, but also not to doubt that I experienced SOMEthing. Always keeping the mind open, not EXPECTING things to happen in a certain way is good.

While I take for myself certain views, I don't think it is a matter of 'convenience' to identify these aspects this way, just that it is my best understanding at this time, the best envisioning so far. I'm giving names and images for the infinite, really, but it isnt' trying to 'limit' the infinite to any preconceived notion. Therein lies dangerous dogma.

Have I been exploring what is 'infinite'? Is Set infinite? I think the mysteries are infinite, the more we explore, the more we find. Each question answered brings forth ten new. 'Chaos and order' writ large, 'chaos and order' within each psyche, 'as above, so below'. Add to that the quantum possibilities of parallel worlds, these aspects acting within them, and that's a pretty good case of 'infinite', at least as much as my mind can frame.

Is it infinite to the mind of Set? Is Set 'infinite' in his own mind? Am I 'infinite' in my own mind? It seems so. Is this seeming so an illusion, and when life leaves this body my psyche occupies, is that the end of the seeming infinite? Some think so. While others, others have suspicion of more.

I keep hopeful. I know, for now, there seems 'an eternity in the moment', maybe not 'eternity in an hour', as Blake said, but in THIS MOMENT NOW, there seems to be that. That to me is the marvel of consciousness. Moustafa explains, "The main Egyptian mystical (Sufi) theme is the importance of consciousness, in integrating the inner faculties into comprehension through a gradual process. The Egyptian mystics refer to this process as using all organs of perception for a more comprehensive understanding."(page 27)

The 'importance of consciousness', oh I relate so very much, but then he gives the ultimate goal of his mystical process, which is a negation of the emphasis on consciousness, "Vanishment into the Divine Essence through the cessation of all conscious thought."(Page 37) Cessation of conscious thought to me seems cessation of consciousness all together. I don't want to be "melted/annilated/absorbed/immersed"(page 64), as he describes.

Perhaps then, he would just say then that I'm not a very advanced being. He may think so. But my 'reluctance' to do so, he and I would agree, is because of my attraction to Set, who represents the prideful aspects that will NOT be annilated and absorbed. If your goal is this submersion, then that which is of Set in you is something to be overcome. However, Moustafa declares, "Uniting/balancing and integrating complimentary opposites is one of the main and constant themes in Ancient Egypt." (page 27). To those who understand why from Set comes that which is of strongest Power, we integrate this with its complimentary Vision, which is that which is of Horus.

This is firmly in the realm of 'archetype'. But then I sense something more, and my wondering seems infinite. So many questions, indeed!

Go to Where the Light Shines Through
Go to Archive - May 2006 to April 2007
Go to INDEX of Markings Of My Path
© JAL: