Some considerations in connection with the so-called Brexit-referendum last June 23- 2016
This lecture was given by Dominic Dibble, a co-worker from the Arcane School in London and he allowed us to publish it here.
Good evening everyone and welcome to this meditation at the time of the full moon with the Sun in Cancer. As we know, it is the position of the Sun which matters, as it symbolises the light of consciousness, the Soul, the second aspect. When its energy is conditioned by Cancer, and transmitted through the rulers of Cancer, the Moon and Neptune, then more specific aspects of consciousness are stimulated, and highlighted in the imagination. Tonight, we will be briefly exploring some of these thoughts in the light of recent events – namely, the momentous decision by Britain to leave the European Union. Cancer is particularly relevant, not just because the actual vote took place within the period said to be influenced by Cancer, but also because Cancer is very closely associated with the phenomenon of mass consciousness, and the referendum was a rare opportunity for that mass consciousness to manifest unambiguously.
In fact, we can take one step further back, and recognise that Cancer is one arm of the Cardinal Cross. The Cardinal Cross represents one of the most esoteric energetic influences to which all lives are exposed. Its subtle impacts on individual human beings are only really sensed when they reach the exalted status of the third initiation; by which time their point of identification in consciousness has already moved mostly from the individual to the group. So the Cardinal Cross would have no influence on individual persons who are still mass conscious. However, it would have a subtle impact on the whole mass, for the Cardinal Cross deals only with wholes; and it would also affect directly those initiates in whom the dynamic will-to-good of the whole is beginning to emerge – those who are responding to Shamballa. Shamballa, as an expression of the first ray of will, is connected with the realm of politics, and we know the will can be used both creatively and destructively. What is striking in the aftermath of the referendum vote is just how much destruction has ensued in British party politics, including – and this is a point we may return to later when we talk about Neptune – the almost dreamlike vanishing into relative oblivion of all the figureheads of the Leave campaign. One could be forgiven for thinking that they were somehow illusory. Incidentally, linking Shamballa with politics is not intended to suggest that current politicians are themselves responding individually to it. Where such a person emerges, then you have the true states-man or -woman – the politician who can give genuine and effective expression to the will of the people of a nation, and is thus empowered to enter into meaningful and productive relationship with other states-men or women for the greater good of the whole.
The European Union is interesting from the standpoint of mass consciousness and national consciousness, because it is a relatively unique experiment in attempting to find a way of integrating multiple national consciousnesses into a greater whole. Like any human experiment, it is imperfect, and it is some of those imperfections which many Leave campaigners chose to dwell upon with intensity, projecting into mass consciousness inflated and distorted images, thus stirring up some of the lower strata of the astral plane. In answer, the Remain campaigners tended to appeal more to the lower mind, but without any real effort to engage the imagination and goodwill of the populace, to counteract the negative astral turbulence created by Leave; and where they did use emotional appeal, it was mainly through the negative fear of economic damage. When one recognises that the centre of gravity of mass consciousness is most definitely in the astral realm, it is not difficult to see why the Leave campaigners were more effective.
One point which was made by a number of commentators was that it seemed strange to reduce such a complicated question as membership of the European Union to a simple “yes” or “no”. Indeed, the matter of what such a complex project as the European Union actually represents in the mass imagination is hardly straightforward. The Tibetan makes an intriguing suggestion in “Externalisation of the Hierarchy” which may indicate that the European Union does not take sufficient account of a major distinction in mass consciousness, a distinction that seems to manifest in many different nations, namely the so-called “North-South” divide. But before we look into this a little further, let’s pause briefly and then say together the Mantram of Unification, replacing the term “sons” by “souls”.
I seek to love, not hate.
I seek to serve and not exact due service;
I seek to heal, not hurt.
Let pain bring due reward of light and love.
Let the soul control the outer form,
And life and all events;
And bring to light the love
That underlies the happenings of the time.
Let vision come and insight.
Let the future stand revealed.
Let inner union demonstrate
And outer cleavages be gone.
Let love prevail.
Let all men love.
In “Externalisation… – p.199-200”, the Tibetan makes the following suggestion for the political organisation of the world after the end of the Second World War:
“Certain major groupings would seem possible and probably advisable. They might be divided as follows:
1. A Federal Union of the great democracies after the war. This might include the British Empire as a whole, the United States, the Scandinavian countries and certain northern European nations, including Germany.
2. A Union of the Latin countries, including France, Spain, all the Mediterranean countries, the Balkan countries (except one or two which might be absorbed into the U.S.S.R.), and South America.
3. The United Soviet Socialist Republics and certain Asiatic nations working in collaboration with them, such as China, and later Japan.
These three great blocs would not be antagonistic blocs but simply geographical spheres of influence. They would all three work in the closest unity and economic relation. Each nation within the three blocs would preserve its sovereign independence, but between these independent nations and between these blocs there would be identity of purpose, unity of effort and the recognition of the economic control of a league of nations. This league, being formed of the representatives of all the nations and its inner governing body being chosen by the three blocs, would control all sources of supply, distribute all such supplies and determine all economic policies.
With the details of these future adjustments I shall not deal. They must be wrought out by the men and women of goodwill in the crucible of experiment and experience.”
The Tibetan is speaking from the angle of one who can perceive major distinctions in mass consciousness, so while this suggestion was made some time ago, it still deserves consideration. What is noteworthy about this suggestion is that, leaving aside the American elements for the moment, the first two Unions proposed would more or less correspond with the northern and southern parts of the European Union. We know from the bitter experience of Greece, Spain and Portugal trying to conform to the economic strictures of euro membership that there seems to be a degree of friction between the northern and southern parts of the EU. It is impossible to know whether the Tibetan’s proposed structure would work better in practice than what we now have, but it does suggest that the imposition of an artificial uniformity of action on too large a mass consciousness may not always prove workable. It also highlights the fact that the “mass” in “mass consciousness” is not undifferentiated – indeed, nations would not exist if human consciousness was the same everywhere. So the challenge the EU faces, of working with a very large mass consciousness with internal differentiation, is an extremely difficult task. Because the EU has until now been perceived as primarily a political and economic project, it is not surprising that the virtues that it has sought to promote have tended to align with the forces of economic globalisation, namely, the efficient movement of goods, services and people. We may wonder whether the exit of Britain from the Union will give it pause to consider whether more weight ought to be given to the cultural and psychological dimensions of union.
It is also worth recalling just how young the European Union is. Although its roots can be traced back to the European Coal and Steel Community, founded in 1951, the actual birth of the Union can fairly be said to have taken place in the sign of Aquarius on 7 February 1992, in Maastricht. With the signing of the Maastricht treaty, the concepts of European citizenship, with its implication of freedom of movement and residence, and the single currency, the euro, came into being. Why Maastricht? Because at the time, the Dutch had the presidency of the EU Council; and Maastricht has a fair claim to be the oldest settlement in the Netherlands, dating back to Roman times. In Destiny of the Nations, the Tibetan gives the constellations ruling the Netherlands; and Cancer rules the personality, while Aquarius rules the soul. Maastricht is also closely connected with the element of water, for its name means “crossing of the river Maas” and it sits on both banks of the Maas, which rises in France, where it is called the Meuse. Like many other major rivers which cross national boundaries, the Meuse/Maas is the subject of an international agreement amongst France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Belgium. The Maas also has an interesting role in mass consciousness, acting on the one hand as an apparent link with the South, and on the other as a boundary marker. But before we consider these points a little further, let’s focus on the immediate aftermath of the Maastricht treaty, which was not uncontroversial.
The process of ratifying the treaty was fraught with difficulties in three states. In Denmark, the first Danish Maastricht Treaty referendum was held on 2 June 1992 but a shortfall of fewer than 50,000 votes resulted in the treaty not being ratified. After the failure, alterations were made to the treaty through the addition of the Edinburgh Agreement which lists four Danish exceptions. The treaty was eventually ratified the following year on 18 May 1993 after a second referendum was held in Denmark. In September 1992, a referendum in France only narrowly supported the ratification of the treaty, with 51.05% in favour. Uncertainty over the Danish and French referendums was one of the causes of the turmoil on the currency markets in September 1992, which led to the pound’s expulsion from the Exchange Rate Mechanism – which may ultimately have contributed to the British refusal to join the euro. In Britain, an opt-out from the treaty’s social provisions was opposed in Parliament by the opposition Labour and Liberal Democrat Members of Parliament, and the treaty itself by the Maastricht rebels within the governing Conservative Party. The number of rebels exceeded the Conservative majority in the House of Commons, and thus the government of John Major came close to losing the confidence of the House. In accordance with British constitutional convention, specifically that of parliamentary sovereignty, ratification of the treaty in Britain was not subject to approval by referendum – but we could regard the referendum of 2016 as the delayed response to the Maastricht treaty and its subsequent revisions. Once again, it seems that, not just in Britain, the centre of gravity of mass consciousness, as expressed through the referendum process, was not as far advanced as the leaders of the European Union had thought. This provides an example of the more general point which world servers and working disciples everywhere need to recognise – that humanity cannot be rushed through the gates of utopia. Rather, it is the task of servers to painstakingly build the bridges in the mental and emotional bodies of humanity which will allow higher ideals to filter down into mass consciousness.
Returning to how that mass consciousness expresses itself, let’s move back in time a little further, to the first half of the fifteenth century, the heyday of the Duchy of Burgundy under Duke Philip the Good. During his reign from 1419 to 1467, the territory of the Duchy expanded to include many territories along the valley of the Meuse, stretching all the way into the Netherlands. The course of the Meuse/Maas is roughly north-south through France and into the Netherlands past Maastricht, until it takes a sharp turn east-west near Nijmegen and heads into the great river delta formed by it and the Rhine and Scheldt rivers. These three rivers thus form a kind of natural border between the north and south of the Netherlands, and also what seems to be an informal border in mass consciousness. North of the rivers could be described as being more ‘Nordic’ or Germanic, and more associated with Protestantism, and south of the rivers is more predominantly Roman Catholic; and one adjective used to describe the difference in this southern culture is ‘Bourgondische’, thus echoing the historical link.
More specifically, a notable difference south of the rivers is the tradition of Carnaval, most celebrated in the southern provinces North Brabant and Limburg. Dutch Carnaval is officially celebrated on the Sunday through Tuesday preceding Ash Wednesday. Although traditions vary from town to town, some common characteristics of Dutch Carnaval include a parade, a “Carnaval prince” who supposedly supplants the Mayor, attended by a jester, a Peasant Wedding, and eating herring on Ash Wednesday. Two main variants can be distinguished: the Rhineland Carnaval found in the province of Limburg, and the Bourgondische Carnaval found mainly in North Brabant. Maastricht, Limburg’s capital, holds a street Carnaval that features elaborate costumes resembling Venetian influences. In the Netherlands the first documentation of the Carnaval is found in 1383 in Den Bosch. Normal daily life comes to a stop for about a week in the southern part of the Netherlands, with roads temporarily blocked, and many local businesses closed for the week. Also, for the period of Carnaval, the names of cities and towns change – for example, Zwolle becomes Sassendonk, and Maastricht becomes Meestrech.1)This is not entirely consistent with the facts: In Brabant and other southern (non-Limburg) provinces some cities at the time of Carnival use other names, for example, Den Bosch is called Oeteldonk, Eindhoven is Lampegat and Nijmegen is called Knotsenburg. The Limburg towns and villages often refer to the name of the local carnival-gilds: for example, Maastricht – Tempeleers, Sittard – Marotte, Beek – Pottentaote, Heerlen -. Winkbuulle etc. It has been talking about the Realm of Tempeleers, – of the Marotte, – of the Pottentaote or the Realm of the Winkbuulle. The name Mestreech is not typical for carnival, but the dialect form of Maastricht. (Translator’s note)
Carnaval is of course not exclusive to the Netherlands, and one of its main defining characteristics is its sense of the suspension of everyday responsibilities, and subversion or even inversion of normal roles. Part of this is made possible through the wearing of specific costumes and masks, which free people to act in ways they would not normally act. While in the Middle Ages, this temporary upending of the social fabric may have been intended to help relieve tensions between feudal rulers and ruled, perhaps nowadays we could regard it as a form of informal protest against the ‘efficiency’ and ‘uniformity’ which globalisation seeks to create – or more positively, as an expression of diversity, of the rootedness in place of local forms of mass consciousness. To give one example of how localised these traditions are, the Carnaval of Binche in Belgium features a character called the Gille, the origins of which remain obscure, who wears a mask with green spectacles during one part of the festivities, and in another part, a huge head-dress with ostrich feathers, and who pelts onlookers with blood oranges. To quote General De Gaulle on diversity, “How can you govern a country which has 246 varieties of cheese?” If governing a diverse nation is difficult, so much more difficult is the task of the European Union. Finding the key which allows diversity to flourish in unity could be said to be the riddle of Cancer.
As mentioned earlier, Neptune is the main planetary influence in Cancer, appearing as the Soul and Hierarchical ruler, and standing behind the Moon as the Personality ruler. Because Neptune is connected with dreams, glamour and the fantastical, there is also a connection with the idea of Carnaval. The figure of the carnaval prince is a kind of lord of mis-rule, who appears for a brief period and then vanishes again, and looking back on the referendum process, one could perhaps suggest that some of the figures involved played a similar role.
On a wider scale, a worrying tendency among some people commenting on the result online has been to identify the whole of British opinion with either Leave or Remain. This again ignores the difference not just between the two opinions, but also the distinctions in mass opinion that exist within each grouping. Those who are chosen to negotiate the complex untangling of British relationships with the EU will need an almost superhuman level of impersonality and detachment if they are to set aside the heated rhetoric and manage the process productively for both sides.
In Neptune – Mother of Myths, Glamour and Utopias, written in 1963, Dane Rudhyar speaks of Neptune as “the cosmic symbol of the ‘great dreams’ of our imagining.” He notes that there is “what appears to be a Neptunian kind of ambition and of human togetherness — and it may actually haunt the person who experiences it — but it is the ambition to surrender oneself totally to the building of a new world, a new type of human relationship…
Saturnian provincialism transforms itself into Neptunian federalism; in turn, the federal structures, once they have become familiar and strongly operative, become Saturnian bondage to the internationalist who seeks to establish Neptunian patterns of supernational organizations like the United Nations or the new ‘Europe’ that the truly progressive minds of that continent are envisioning and yearning for — and slowly building step after step.” (extracts from online article at www.khaldea.com/rudhyar/astroarticles/neptunemother.php). This interplay between Saturn and Neptune is significant because Capricorn, the polar opposite of Cancer, has Saturn as both Personality and Soul ruler. Thus it is perhaps in the synthesis of these two signs that a true diversity-in-unity can emerge.
When Britain joined what was then the European Economic Community in 1973, another name for it was the “Common Market”. This term does suggest a rather narrow focus on economic goals. Yet the market square can be a place not just for trade, but also for meeting, conversation and the celebration of local tradition – a place where diversity is revealed. Let us hope that, in time, we can meet in the market square, not just as consumers, but as true European citizens, celebrating the local, the traditional and the diverse, while dreaming together the great dream of peace and freedom. Then the European Union will stand before the world as a truer symbol of enlightened mass consciousness, one of many lighted houses in the great city of Humanity.
The seed thought for our meditation tonight is “I build a lighted house and therein dwell.”
Noten [ + ]
|1.||↑||This is not entirely consistent with the facts: In Brabant and other southern (non-Limburg) provinces some cities at the time of Carnival use other names, for example, Den Bosch is called Oeteldonk, Eindhoven is Lampegat and Nijmegen is called Knotsenburg. The Limburg towns and villages often refer to the name of the local carnival-gilds: for example, Maastricht – Tempeleers, Sittard – Marotte, Beek – Pottentaote, Heerlen -. Winkbuulle etc. It has been talking about the Realm of Tempeleers, – of the Marotte, – of the Pottentaote or the Realm of the Winkbuulle. The name Mestreech is not typical for carnival, but the dialect form of Maastricht. (Translator’s note)|