Civilizational cycles and the direction of the process (#1250)

Related Documents:
The First Cambrian Explosion
The Second Cambrian Explosion
(#1215) Higher Level Evolution - Second Cambrian Explosion
(#1221) Growth and Decay of Civilisation
(#1228) Informal/Formal Structures and Organic/Mechanistic Perspectives
(#1229) Transitional Phases are Unbalanced - with awareness we may participate
(#1258) Approaching the future
(#1279) Underlying Context for the Discussion on Civilisation
(#1318) Sustainability and Balance of Power
Also see other excerpts from my discussions with the Society for Scientific Exploration.

Civilistion may inherently go in cycles. There are numerous accounts of this phenomenon.

Does the companion star hypothesised by civilisational myths accord with the companion star hypothesised by extinction events such as the dinosaurs? That star apparently has a period of 64 millions years or so and at its closest orbital approach it disturbs the Oort field which sends a meteorite shower spiralling through the solar system, past the Earth and into the Sun. But a 64 million year period is too long for civilisational effects. Has this companion star been disproved? Could there be two companions stars?

Also I personally tend to steer away from the vedic concept of Kali Yuga even though I have been inspired by Vedic thought in most other respects, this is because, in my understanding, it implies that we are just at the beginning of a million or so years of devolution, in which eventually all knowledge and wisdom will be lost, humans will increasingly live short brutal lives devoid of all hope and will eventually just kill each other on sight. What is your understanding of this myth? It is not a very positive outlook or analogy for the future. The only way I can assimilate it with the rest of Vedic knowledge and with other myths of global evolution is to think that maybe the Vedic Rishis are talking solely about the condition within Maya (the world illusion) - thus as the majority of beings attain realisation and see through the illusion, those that remain are increasingly the unevolved beings that refuse to move on, thus Maya becomes an anachronism populated by beings who are ruled by their baser instincts. If suffering is the mechanism to force us to turn within then such a world would contain many hard lessons.

I know a little about the civilisational mythology of Western Esotericism as described by Alice Bailey - it speaks of seven stages of evolution and relates the evolution of humanity to the parallel path of the evolution of a single being. The seven stages relate to the seven chakras and as we come to operate at successively higher energies our consciousness (both individual and collective) becomes increasingly refined and able to penetrate the many illusions that comprise our experience of the world.

Four main stages are called Lemurian, Atlantean, Aryan and the Dweller on the Threshold. I'm no scholar on this subject but there's a few comments here if anyone is interested... (go to either of these two URL's and then search for the word 'aryan' and you will find some comments)

Also, Walter, you say we are on the ascendancy. Without giving too much of your book away, what do you think is the nature of the past cycle, what will be the nature of the coming cycle and where do you think these cycles are leading? What do other's think? Most myths, in my understanding, lead toward a more refined awareness, more evolved consciousness and more collective integration, what do you think? Could there also be some kind of meta system transition event that gives rise to higher levels of collective consciousness and thereby higher level states of being (see the posting #1215)? Also see:

As for the question, why do civilisations seem to flower into their prime early on and then innevitably grind down to some kind of demise? I think it is closely related to the way that organisms flower in their youth and then grind down toward old age and death. There is no intrinsically in-built mechanism for this but there are processes that arise which create this phenomenon. This is related to the ego (or formal structure, e.g. government) and it's relationship with the underlying organic reality. I feel that it is countless instances of mechanistic abuse imposed on the organic reality that gradually undermines the holistic health of the complex system and drives it through stages of increasing instability. If this where the case, then by living holistically a civilisation (even an individual) need never die. Just as the ecosystem has overcome all obstacles in the past but now that it has been assimilated into a global regime as a 'resource' it is undergoing a demise. The phenomenon of demise is described in a short story here:

And the general situation is analysed further here:

I'd like to put a question to everyone - where do they think or feel that this process is heading? By process I mean the conglomeration of evolution, civilisation, consciousness, life and so on. Where has it come from, what have been the fundamental trends of the process and where could it be going? It is both a fascinating and important idea to ponder...

Furthermore, in my understanding of the origins of morality, there is no concept of good or bad except within the context of an agenda. E.g. if the world was truly random there would be no inherent good or bad. Or if one's agenda was to head North then things that take one north are 'good' whereas things that take one south are 'bad'. Does the world have an agenda? Does it have a direction? If so what kind of values does this direction create? Are we living according to any such values? Is it inherently 'bad' to be destroying forests? Or could it be 'good' in some sense if it was furthering a broader agenda such as the evolution of consciousness?