Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
My friend’s question was deceptively simple:
“How do you know when you’re having dialogue with your Angel versus just talking to yourself? I’m searching for a way to have the dialogue without feeling like I’m going mental.”
Normally, I’d dodge questions like these, since the HGA is such an individual thing that it can be positively misleading to offer opinions. But what came to me was mostly based around negatives, and I’d just come back from a very liquid lunch, so I produced a reply. Afterwards, I was semi-pleased with it, so I thought I’d repeat my response here. I’ve cleaned up a few sentences and omitted a couple of personal details, but it’s essentially what I wrote to my friend, and summarises what I think I’ve learned over the years. Most people reading this blog have probably come to similar conclusions, but it doesn’t hurt to compare notes from time to time.
– – – – – – –
The conditions of the dialogue are always going to keep shifting as we mature, or move through different phases of our life and our initiatory process. Sometimes I do get words that I believe originate from the Angel. They’re very simple, matter-of-fact, and dead on in terms of the “Oh, year – that’s very true” feeling that comes in. There is no emotional affect at all in the delivery, not even any outward sense of love. Any emotion comes from my own reactions that follow.
A secondary thing is glimpsing a kind of silvery flashing on a level of vision that’s not quite physical. The colour itself can’t exist in nature, at least so my eyes could perceive it physically. It comes in on what you might call the etheric level of my vision. It’s a confirmation that I’m connecting, nothing more, and it’s clearest when I do invocations.
But direct messages are very rare. Mostly, the communication is indirect, through events, or meetings with other people. Or entire life-situations. The HGA ‘talks’ in paragraphs or pages, or even chapters – not in sentences. That’s why there’s so much drill and practice in occultism: we have to become very good listeners, able to use our imaginations to interpret symbols, which are the HGA’s preferred language.
This means I ignore all predictions or prophecies or messages that I am about to receive a gift, or a word from On High. That stuff is just my mind wishing that things would be so. “Soon your life will improve” is never a reliable statement, as far as I’m concerned. But seeing myself doing something more constructive might be one.
I do think my HGA has intervened at times and prevented me ending up in the wrong place, such as when it woke me after I fell asleep at the wheel of the car and had nearly gone into the barrier at 100 kph. Last year I should have gone into the back of a truck because it had no lights at all at the back, and it was doing about 25 kph on a very dark freeway. I was doing 95 to 100 kph, and I only saw it from 50 yards back, and then realised it was barely moving when I was barely a third of that distance away.
I’d started to brake, but then I stomped down on it; but I could see I was bound to hit the truck. In the dark, and with only half a second to go before impact, I didn’t dare even glance in the mirrors to see what other traffic was around. Yet the vehicle I was driving skidded, spun out into the next lane, where there was no other close traffic, and ended up in the central reservation, having done nothing worse than stalling. I couldn’t have contrived such a scenario on my own.
Beyond such emergency interventions, I feel all the HGA’s observations and contributions are entirely non-evaluative and hands-off. There is no “This is bad/good,” or “You should feel X or Y about this.” It allows my conscious self to make its own calls, and to keep on screwing up. Endlessly.
How do I know it’s not just my own craziness talking? I can’t know, really. The clues are that (1) what is offered isn’t impossible to follow, or to work up to, so I don’t have to head off to my personal Mordor in the morning, to challenge the Lord of Darkness; (2) the lack of emotional content in the communication, since my own mind is full of value-judgements; (3) the information probably doesn’t come as a direct answer to anything I ask about, because my questions are asked from within my human dilemmas, not from an objective viewpoint that includes them but goes beyond them. The HGA is well beyond them, and so it isn’t half as concerned as I am over today’s problems, or this week’s; and lastly, (4) there is no quality in the interaction of the source needing to impress me with its power or wisdom, since the strong and the wise are beyond fear or vanity.
Our friend (X) once talked about having started to get the real stuff, then getting something that felt iffy. It was pandering to much to his own concerns, or maybe contradicting them. But it didn’t transcend them, as it should have, so he dismissed it as a mental construct or qlippothic interruption.
– – – – – – –
I’d be interested if anyone else has comments on the notes I’ve copied here, confirming my view or contradicting it, or adding another perspective.
Love is the law, love under will,