The New Groups
by Henry Guy
We are beginning to see the influence of Aquarius all through the present state of our civilization, and nowhere more so than in the nature of group. That might be the case because the very essence of Aquarius has to do with group. The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature of the Aquarian groups as they begin to manifest.
The new groups reflecting this influence operate more freely from the limitations of geography, time, language, and even incarnation. Leadership tends to be taken as a collaborative responsibility, rather than invested in a person, office, or position. The group antakarana is found to be more dimensional and effective than is the individual one, and this is changing the nature of education, knowledge, and the evolution of consciousness. At least for now, group organization is minimal and used only as needed, thus reflecting a new relationship with form altogether.
Group: The New Unit
The flowering of the Piscean civilization laid a firm foundation for the possibilities Aquarius brings. In Pisces, many found their way from mass consciousness to somewhat more full individuality. The expansion and reconfiguration of business, exploration, technology, along with novel and idealistic interpretations of politics and religions, all seemed to excite the spirit of adventure and audacity that it took for many to move into a more developed self-consciousness, and in many ways the individual became the prime unit of civilization.
In Aquarius the unit of civilization might very well become the group. Certainly, we have had groups long before Pisces or Aquarius, and in each civilization the nature of the group reflected the nature of that civilization. Before Pisces, a group was generally the mass. During Pisces, a group distinguished itself from the mass by essentially joining together as a collection of individualizing individuals. These groups functioned through the autonomy of the individual, but also through competition for distinction, status, and leadership.
Today, many are reveling in the apparent freedom and capacity of a developing individual consciousness. However, some are beginning to reach the end of their reveling. Individuality is becoming a limiting factor. While valid and an enormous step in the right direction, individuality seems to be only one aspect of a full, meaningful existence. Other aspects call for more connection, for a unity that expands, enhances, and puts into a new perspective what it means to be a true individual within a greater whole. The Aquarian group is far from a return to mass consciousness, and a leap forward from a collection of individuals. It is the natural evolution of individuality. In Aquarius, the autonomous, responsible, integrated individual is given the opportunity of finding his or her greater identity, greater power, greater sagacity, and greater creativity as group. This identity of full individuality efflorescing as group, might become the new unit of civilization.
All we have now are the first shoots of these groups breaking their way into manifestation; they are more promise than substance. For the most part, even these groups are unaware of what they are, and maybe even that they are. Some are more subjective in orientation, others more objective. Yet, they all carry into expression a fresh and dynamic sense of what being group means.
What Is a Group?
In this time of the internet and ease of travel, we are experiencing a huge expansion of objective connectivity. Is it possible that what we are observing is the manifestation of a deepening and expanding subjective connectivity? And could this subjective connectivity be along lines we rarely consider? Besides the connectivity of incarnates to other incarnates, could there also be more subjective connection with humans not in physical incarnation (between incarnations), as well with those who have moved beyond the need for incarnation? If that is true, it brings into question just what a group might be.
Objectively, a group on the physical plane is just what it appears to be, a collection of incarnated individuals, but what is the group subjectively? Could there be a subjective connectivity that most of us are unaware of between those (incarnated and not incarnated) on the same ray, or preparing for the same initiation, or from the same ashram? These possibilities might explain why ideas, intuitions, and insights seem to fall into one’s consciousness, many times without searching for them. Could all these communications be constantly circulating (resounding, refracting?) throughout these subjective groups, even though such a group is not aware of itself as a group? Could this be a kind of evidence that our groupness extends into a very much wider group than any objective group would indicate? Is it possible that we are already sending and receiving insights, thoughts, inspirations, feelings, and even words throughout this subjective connectivity without being overly conscious of doing so?
Each member of a physical plane group is at his or her particular stage in the evolution of consciousness. Each has a particular set of rays and astrological influences. Each has a unique relationship to and within humanity and the three worlds. Each has a unique alignment with and attunement to the subtler realities. It is the differences in the group that make it useful to the Plan. Take the variation of rays within an objective group for example. If the group considers a concept together, the various ray perspectives enrich and dimensionalize the group subjective receptivity, and a wider, more abundant, more vital group interpretation could be achieved in a cooperative effort. This would especially be so if the wider groupness, including the subjective group rays, were appreciated and synthesized into a whole. And that is only the receptivity. What makes the group service so valuable to the Plan is its multifaceted interrelation and connectivity within humanity. Could a service of such a group be that of consciously connecting group insights to the needs of humanity via its objective and subjective connectivity?
The New Groups and Leadership
Here we find a defining aspect of the Aquarian groups, one that becomes more obvious in contrast with leadership in groups under the strong influence of Pisces. Those groups tended to be composed of individualizing members and a more strongly individualized leader. Leadership was usually quite defined, positional, official, and hierarchical. Leadership was based on authority and strength, many times with an oligarchy vying and contending for the leadership position or positions. Most leaders were forced to compete for and defend their leadership from those who would take it. The other members tended to acquiesce to the leader’s authority, and relinquish responsibility for the group to that leader. Even so, the burgeoning sense of discrimination and independence of the membership frequently led to strong undercurrents of criticism of the leadership, with resulting factionalizing. This is not meant to be a diminishment of Piscean group leadership; it was exactly what groups needed, and this leadership method served and continues to serve us well. Most, if not all of us probably have used and still use this method, both as the leader and/or the led, and have used it to great advantage in the furthering of the Plan.
The Aquarian groups are struggling with the understanding and implementation of another approach to leadership. In taking the identity of group, as opposed to a member of a group, no individual can be the sole leader. Groupness itself is the leader.
In these new groups, each member recognizes her or his own natural leadership, but also how those natural tendencies play through and synthesize within the group. The nature of this essence common to us all arises from our relationship to the Divine Will, our relationship to the purpose and intent of the greater Being of which we are subsidiary beings. Of course this relationship is somewhat dormant and unconscious depending on our awakening to it; but by our existence within this greater whole, it is perhaps the most fundamental aspect of our being. In one sense, each of us are manifestations of this divine purpose, and more significantly, we are agents (or potential agents) of this divine purpose in manifestation.
As separated individuals, this Divine Will seems to be one’s own will, and at that stage of unfoldment, for all practical purposes, it is. As one increasingly assumes the greater identity of group, individual will becomes more and more insufficient, limited, skewed, and overly qualified by the specifics of the individuality. Yet, within the synthesis of all the will in and of the group, this individualness becomes more than it ever has been. Using the analogy of the group making music, the individual will becomes a note in that music. Any single note becomes more alive in relation to the other notes; in that relation it takes on deeper meaning and greater significance, becoming more of what it was always meant to be. It also becomes clear that if any note were removed, the music would not be all it could be.
The currency of the relationship of the individual will, group will, and divine will is inspiration. Of course there was inspiration in Pisces. Because it was the age of the flowering of the individual, a few individuals seemed to become inspired while others did not seem to be so. Inspiration had to use the avenue open to it. The inspired one would carry the inspiration into a vision, an ideal, a plan, and even a program before sharing it with the group. While the other group members were unaware of the inspiration at the level of the inspired one, they could begin to be affected by the inspiration as it was presented as vision, plan, or program. This transference of inspiration through its formulation and explanation was the service of the inspired one to the group as well as to the purpose attempting to manifest through the inspiration.
Inspiration as Aquarian group is different. It could very well be that group was always the receptive agency of inspiration, regardless of the appearance that only one (or a few) of the group seemed to be inspired. These new groups work from the realization that the whole group is simultaneously inspired. What makes group reception both difficult and entirely engaging is the various receptive natures manifesting within a group. Again, it is the differences in the receptive natures of the participants that provide a wider field of receptivity, and when all these differences are encouraged and brought to light, the greater nature of the inspiration becomes available to the group.
Once this wide field of inspiration is appreciated within the group, a new approach to leadership naturally ensues. Instead of centralized leadership (one leader directing followers), we find distributed leadership, where the leadership potential is activated in each member of the group. Instead of each competing for the leadership, the leadership within each cooperates with the leadership of every other. Instead of one or another, it becomes one and another as expressions of the same inspiration. One could see this approach as leaderless, in the sense that there is no position of leader held by an individual. In practice, however, it is leader-full.
Aquarian groupness recognizes that inspiration springs from a common source, but also that the dimensionality of inspiration is better comprehended in diversity. Diversity of reception as well as diversity of interpretation brings forth a much better understanding and manifestation of the purpose at the source of the inspiration. This is its intrinsic strength, but in this age of transition from one interpretation of leadership to another, it is also unclear how to go about it. Do all the interpretations of inspiration vie for supremacy, resulting in one that emerges as the best, one where all participants then acquiesce with varying degrees of willingness? Does doggedly pursued group process result in unanimous understanding? Do the various understandings and interpretations coalesce around a few interpretations held by various factions? Or, is each unique understanding and interpretation held together in a greater synthesis of all of them?
These are not easy questions to fully answer right now. Anyone who followed the group process of Occupy Wall Street can get a sense of just how difficult it can be to attempt to practice group leadership. Without a leader, they strove for consensus, and this led to hours of individual presentations that turned into days, then weeks. They were not without results, but coming to any sort of consensus was clearly tedious.
Another example of this approach to leadership is the Arab Spring. Since there was no official organization, there was no official leader. It was simply a group of people who were similarly inspired to connect, coordinate, and act. The initial results were dramatic evidence of the potential of this method of leadership; seemingly entrenched dictator after dictator was overthrown. However, the subsequent events attest to how new, untested, and awkward this method can be at this stage of its unfoldment. The Arab Spring movement seemed to easily lose whatever momentum it had, and was usurped by the more traditionally organized groups. Even so, it was clearly something new.
Further contrasting the two leadership methods, we could note that the Piscean leader tended to command loyalty to the ideals she or he was inspired by; and this loyalty was implemented by a kind of singlemindedness that led frequently to a strict uniformity. The leader could insist on limiting the education of the followers to certain proscribed teachings, ones that reflected the ideals in line with the way that the leader interpreted them on behalf of the followers. This uniformity could be extended into all aspects of living: language, social convention, religion or philosophy, and even dress. An example of this imposed uniformity was Mao’s China.
The potential for Aquarian leadership is highly dimensional, group inspiration leading to a cooperative, coordinated, multiform expression and implementation. The natural diversity of humankind could move in myriad ways in response to a realized, inspiring purpose. The beauty of this approach is the lack of imposition of both the inspiration and the course of action taken in response. Both would come from within; neither would be imposed on the unwilling. Diversity of implementation could be welcomed, instead of discouraged. Cooperative action within a group, or groups within a larger group, would spring from similarity of interpretation of and consequent expression of the inspiration. Obviously, this approach to leadership has a long way to go. Even so, following its arc into the future, one can see that this will have a dramatic effect on government and leadership at all levels and in all fields.
In one sense, every individual problem is also a group problem, and the solution cannot lie exclusively in one realm or another; the problem must be solved individually and as a group. What it would mean to have a large group, say everyone particularly interested in a specific world problem, consider that problem together? And, it would be a group of peers, meeting on the level, each realizing that they have a voice and a part to play in the solution. The realization of the group ignorance of the solution would become the invocation; the united demand for answers held in the variety of interpretations could set the stage for true group solution, one in which everyone has a stake, one that comes from within each, not imposed from the outside. It is a chance for each of us to realize that together we created human problems, and that together (and only together) do we have the key to their solutions.
The New Groups and Education
Education in Pisces set the stage for what education can be in Aquarius. The scope of education exploded in Pisces; in the early stages, education was primarily for the elite male. By the time of its great flowering, the ideal of education for the masses had taken hold, with basic information and skills becoming available for all, including women, ethnic minorities, and the economically and even physically disadvantaged. The thrust of education in Pisces was training of the mentality (especially memory and reasoning) and exposure to information. The effect on humanity as a whole has been stupendous. More and more of us are able to use our mental natures effectively, and many have become mentally polarized and able to somewhat integrate the physical, emotional, and mental natures into a more complete individuality.
The educational method in Pisces moved from the one-teacher-one-student model to a teacher for a group. Later, incorporating the industrial model, education became quite standardized and organized, allowing greater numbers to move through the system. Generally, the Piscean educational group was composed of a teacher who was educated in general (and perhaps more extensively in a specific area of study) and the students, who were not as educated. The teaching method was frequently simply the dispensing of information about the subject. With the invention of printing, books were used to convey information to the masses like never before; and reading, writing, and gathering and dispensing information exploded. This rapidly expanding cache of information eventually made its way from print at the library to radio, TV and eventually the internet. Now, with virtually all information at our fingertips, education is being asked to become something more than the dispensing of knowledge.
The groups presently experimenting with what that more might mean, are not yet sure what it is. Even so, it might have something to do with the unit of education expanding into groupness. This could foster an expansion of the purpose of education from dispensing knowledge to the ignorant, into the conscious, intentional unfoldment of what it means to be fully human. The focus of education could expand from strictly individual development to include group development, and for the groupness of the individual to naturally unfold.
The word educate is from the Latin root, educare, to lead out, and here we get another insight into these new groups. Who leads? The focus of the knowledgeable or wise one leading the not so knowledgeable or wise ones out of ignorance, seems to be fading into the realization that any leading is ultimately self-initiated. This self is the full self which is at once individual, group, and a synthesis that includes those two with a wholeness we are only beginning to understand.
What is so revealing of our nature is that our full individuality is a reflection of our groupness. Our individual bodies are groups of cells, our emotional lives are groups of feelings, our minds are groups of thoughts. There is an entity that integrates the groups of cells, feelings, and thoughts into an individuality, but this very individuality finds eventually it is also a unit in a much larger group, and in turn that group is an individual in a still larger group. Individuality and groupness seem to be intimately and perhaps infinitely related.
In these new educational groups, the quest for knowledge, especially the knowledge attained and reported by others, is still important, but simply accessing more knowledge is losing its appeal as the final goal. Wisdom is calling us. Knowledge could be thought of as the awareness of the expression of the divine through matter, as the activity caused by the laws of nature. Wisdom could be thought of as consciousness of the purpose of divinity as revealed through the intentions of the universal laws, which are many times not revealed by physical activity, not yet fully embodied in a laws of nature. Knowledge of the laws of nature we find through the senses responding to intelligent activity, and through the mind making sense of what the senses convey. The pursuit of wisdom requires another faculty, that of the intuition connecting the abstract mind with divine purpose, and revealing the nature of that purpose through the agency of a universal law.
Group meditative and contemplative endeavors seem to lend themselves to the use of the intuitive faculty. Intuition seems to be more active, more at home in groupness. Of course, the group is not using intuition to the exclusion of the mind, imagination, or brain activity. It seems to be an addition of it to the mix; or perhaps an infusion of intuition into the use of mind, feelings, and brain.
Intuition must use the antahkarana, a bridge built between the consciousness involved within the mental, feeling, etheric, and physical natures, and the consciousness on the subtler planes or spheres of existence. Intuition is the faculty of the Buddhic plane or sphere. Of course this sphere influences our lives whether or not we have built or are building the antahkarana. Consciously using the antahkarana seems to add a degree of recognition of participation in the process.
The antahkarana is frequently thought of in the individual sense, but these new educational groups find that there is also a group antahkarana, which is more than a collection of those of the individuals. The group antahkarana seems to arise through the synthesis, interrelation, and interaction of those participating; and noting again, the participants might not be limited to the incarnates present. Because of the variety of rays, points in evolution of consciousness, astrological configurations, etc. of the participants, the synthetic nature of the group antahkarana seems to be able to convey a much more dimensional and perhaps more authentic participation in the intuitive process. The group intuitional faculty informing and enlightening the group mind might also provide a wider and more useful interpretation of the impressions received.
In that light, the nature of the educational group is changing. The formal teacher-student relation where the teacher is the individual who is the recognized authority and fount of knowledge, is being replaced. There is a growing recognition that the groupness itself constitutes an invocative as well as a receptive agent of impression. The teacher becomes something more abstract, something less embodied. The teacher is recognized more as an overshadowing principle that connects with an inner being residing in each participant; and in that spark of connection manifests (eventually) into conscious presence in the three worlds.
This manifesting can be instantaneous. All of us have had the experience of reading some presentation of wisdom again and again over the years, and it seems to be enlightening each time. But there might be one time where a realization comes so profoundly, so significantly, that it becomes life-changing. It seems that an inner spark found a way to change the individual life so that it could live in the three worlds more as its own nature.
This whole process seems to be speeded up and intensified in these groups. The very nature of the antahkarana is relational. We tend to think of it as the relation of the subtle to the gross, energy to matter, spirit to form, i.e., the vertical relation. Still, it is also by its very magnetic nature horizontally active; vertical relational activity stimulates the magnetic horizontal activity within the group antahkarana. This horizontal stimulation among all the individual antahkaranas seems to accelerate and enliven the intuitive process for all involved.
This group intuitive process changes the nature of knowledge. The impression of intuition comes as a whole and the whole is expanded in scope by the nature of the group antahkarana. This whole shows itself through time and space, and on many planes. It is more than information. It initiates and empowers its expression, but no expression truly reveals it. The whole, through impression, conveys to the inner divine spark at the core of each of us a note, an awakening, a call to express its very nature. This expression of the divine nature causes a reaction from the worlds it is expressed through. Becoming awake and present as this divine spark in the midst of, and as the cause of this reaction leads to true knowledge. We begin to see the world as it is, and for what it was created. The divine spark, awake in its own life, transmutes information into direct knowledge, into wisdom. The expression of wisdom transforms and re-qualifies the very substance it uses, and in a broad sense this could be considered an aspect of the reappearance of the world teacher, the second aspect, the Christ.
This, perhaps, is the whole purpose of education, and these new groups seem to be aligning themselves with the possibilities of Aquarius and the incarnation of the seventh ray.
The New Groups, Creation and Organization
The ability to create is at the very core of what it means to be human. With every thought, every word, we create, almost as naturally as we breathe. The numbers of humans involved in creation via group far exceed those involved with present day leadership and educational groups. If we consider the general premise of business as the creation of something that is useful (or at least attractive) to others, we can begin to see how widespread group creativity is. It is not just the things like megacities, energy grids, products for individuals, huge transports, or the internet; it is also the creation of the systems that coordinate and manage all the activity that those structures allow, plus the new sciences, arts, and philosophies. None of these huge creations came from the efforts of one person; a group helped to conceive, design, coordinate, build, and implement them all.
Given this acceleration and elaboration of group creativity, what could tiny new creative groups possibly contribute? Here is where the changing nature of group begins to show itself. The form and the formality of group is morphing.
Groups tend to reflect the nature of the individuals composing them. Most individuals seem to be largely identified as their own forms of expression, their own bodies, minds, and feelings. In much the same way most existent groups seem to be largely identified as their organizations. Most groups (those other than the new groups) seem to be things, organizations with defined systems, rules, offices, and functions, and the participants find their place within all of this structure.
On the other hand, the new groups are generally composed of individuals who are losing strict identification with their forms of expression. It is not so much that they have withdrawn all identification from their forms; it is more like they have extended identification to include more than their own vehicles of manifestation. This extension is, in a sense, spherical. It expands into the rarer vibrations of the spiritual kingdoms, but simultaneously into the grosser vibration of matter, of the mineral, plant and animal kingdoms, and out into humankind. It is an extension of identification into the life of humanity as a whole, the other kingdoms in nature, and the One Life of the planet itself.
This extension fosters a new kind of relationship with forms in general. If one is identified explicitly as form, life seems to be coming from the form; one’s life seems to be dependent on form. By extending relationship, consciousness, and eventually identity into the realms of purpose, one can begin to see that any form is simply an expression of and agent of its purpose for being; and the same purpose might (and usually does) express through many forms. Life is not dependent on form; it is just the reverse: form is dependent on and exists within life. Instead of living from form, one can begin to live through form, consciously expressing its purpose more completely.
The formalism of the old groups arose out of a need to control wildness within the group, and this arises from the lack of complete control that the participants might have over their own vehicles of manifestation. In order for the group process to be safe, orderly, just, productive, etc., and to be fitted to the ideal(s) of the founder(s) of the group, procedures and rules had to be agreed upon. This includes procedures for becoming a member and for losing membership, and penalties for violating the rules. This approach is apparent in national and civic groups, religious, academic, and defense groups, as well as most businesses.
The new groups are taking a different approach to organization. Imagine a group where common inspiration initiates it into action without the need for formal organization. This is not so far-fetched. If a child is drowning, the crowd springs into action without rules or procedure. Some dive in to save the child. Some call the ambulance. Some administer first aid. Some get blankets. Everyone instantly knows what to do, and does it. The purpose for the group action is crystal clear to all concerned, and it is all that is needed for its naturally-coordinated, spontaneous action. The action does not require a form or a formal organization, membership, rules, etc. This demonstrates something that is naturally present within us all. It is this naturalness of group life in action that the new groups are experimenting with.
A legitimate criticism of this emergency example is that it is a one-time event. The people involved probably will never see each other again. What about the group that works together all the time? This is where, through long periods of interaction we find that we might rub each other the wrong way at some point. It is here that many groups find their greatest challenges, and the principle reason that many groups split or disband, or worse, limp along because it is undermining its own creative actions from within the group.
The new groups see this friction between participants as not only inevitable, but welcome it. Opposition, irritation, jealousy, disgust, etc. arising from group interaction is evidence to the new group that the group alignment is functioning, and that the group is moving forward. Both inspiration and intuition affect the entire person. They stimulate all the best in us, but also the old, ingrained, oppositional patterns we have inculcated from lifetime to lifetime. When the group initiates action in response to inspiration, many of these old patterns will rise up in opposition. Taking a step forward is opposed by the fear of inadequacy, and the fear of making a mistake, of looking foolish, or moving into the unknown. Forward group motion can challenge any group member’s sense of authority; it might also enliven one’s sense of authority, and either can stand in the way of group progress. The same thing holds true for challenging or stimulating our cherished ideals, especially the ones we are so closely identified with.
These groups are useful because they are composed of individuals who have not cleared all of this from their vehicles. Transmuting these less than divine qualities and patterns is at least part of the mission we signed up for by incarnating. We have repeatedly incarnated into substance that carries these patterns, identified as these patterns, and by living them, made them more powerful and entrenched. Together, these oppositional patterns constitute the Dweller on the Threshold.
Instead of regarding the Dweller as some kind of tragic mistake, it could very well be that we incarnated in order to create the Dweller; and in order to create a true Dweller, we had to temporarily lose our divine identity in order to fully assume our corporal, emotional, and mental identity. Out of touch with our divinity, we made do with identity as substance, incorporating the qualities of that substance into our identity. Generally, that substance was intelligent but lacked the relation of its own existence with its divine purpose for being. Love, wisdom, and evolving consciousness could be thought of as the relation of the divine purpose with its intelligent activity. The substance and the being we created and incorporated into (the Dweller) lack love and the sense of purpose that love conveys.
The plan has always been to awaken to our divine nature in the midst of our separative materialization, and redeem the Dweller, as well as the substance from which it is made. Turns out that we are somewhat behind schedule. We, perhaps, overdid the creation part and might be a bit slow at the redeeming part. The Dweller, meanwhile continues to grow and increase in strength. Humanity is living in a prison of its own making, is desperate to gain its freedom, and more importantly find its purpose, and does not have the understanding necessary to do either.
This is where recognizing these patterns for what they are can become so valuable for the group. If regarded as an individual problem, these outworn patterns can easily become something we try to keep locked away from the group. This is because it both makes the individual seem to be less than an ideal member, and it (apparently) interferes with group process. What if these old, obstructive patterns were regarded not as simply individual, but as an individual expression of a human pattern. What if it were not simply a pattern of the individual dweller, but of the composite dweller of Humanity? In that light, the pattern becomes an access point to all humans who also live as that particular pattern, and it might be used in the redemption of the composite dweller of humanity. A human problem cannot truly be solved by an individual solving its own problem; all of us have to solve it, together, before any of us can be completely free from it.
The first step in this redemptive process is recognizing and becoming responsive to (or responsible for) the pattern. One of the reasons that we have tried to keep it at arm’s length, denying its existence, is that we simply did not know anything else to do with it; we hope that if we ignored it long enough it would just die of attrition. That might happen, but if old, obstructive patterns seem to jump into our lives out of seemingly nowhere (provoked by group interaction, or even inspirations), we can assume that the subconscious holds perhaps even a whole field of these patterns. We might think of these patterns as the shadows of our former selves, our former lives. We could assume that we created and held these patterns in the subconscious waiting for the awakening of our true nature, an awakening that we are now experiencing.
Admission of the pattern as a problem takes on a new flavor. Instead of denying it, keeping it out of one’s awareness and especially out of one’s identity, one admits it into one’s consciousness and identity. Instead of only being able to see it in others and reacting to it, admitting that we have this pattern, in a peculiar way, finally admits us into the full scope of our own humanity. That admission allows us, for the first time, to actually work on the reality of the human problem from within it.
If we truly want to change it, we can begin by not only admitting it, but by welcoming it with open arms and an open heart. We begin by recognizing it for what it is and what it is not. It is recognized as a programing of devas elaborated over many lifetimes. While we have invested identity into it in the past, seeing it for what it is releases our investment in it. This release is the beginning of a new relationship with this set of devas. Gratitude naturally arises from the realization of how faithfully these devas have carried out our commands and served our needs over various incarnations. Responsibility arises from the realization that these beings are as dependent on us teaching them what they could be, as we are dependent on them to express, to embody, what we teach. In that moment, one can realize how entwined is the evolution of human consciousness with the evolution of human devas. It is said that the Christ is the teacher of angels and men. It might also be said that the evolving Christ within each of us is the teacher of the evolving angels through which we express.
This is where the intersection of groupness and individuality intersect. Group interaction is instrumental in provoking the patterns; yet only the one participant hosting the patterns can recognize them for what they are and teach those specific devas the new story of what they can be. If the group (or someone in the group) recognizes and tells the one manifesting the pattern that it is a worn out, inappropriate pattern, that pattern will defend itself and make the group (or other person) wrong. If the one hosting the pattern cannot recognize the pattern for what it is, it is because the identity is still wholly invested in the pattern: “This is just who I am.” The ability to step back and recognize the pattern for what it is (and is not) cannot be rushed. It is wholly dependent on the evolution of the participant. And, yet, the atmosphere of the group can contribute to the evolution of the participants along this line. If the group as a whole holds a regard for its devas of expression in this way, any one participant can find it easier to do so.
Another intersection of groupness and individuality is found in teaching the pattern the new story. The teacher (the one exhibiting, recognizing, and admitting the pattern) can realize that the teaching is not limited to the specific devas involved as the individual expression; it is not limited to one’s own vehicles of incarnation. True, heartfelt, enlightened teaching reaches out to all similar human devas, all devas incorporated into like patterns. Also, the teaching reaches out to the human consciousness investing its identity in those patterns. It is not that this radiatory teaching converts the consciousness of other humans or their patterns into a new way of being, but it touches both, slightly coloring them with an openness to the new story. It is a kind of crack in the hard shell of the ego that lets in a little light and wisdom. If a person or group finds that they are even a little more open to these ideas, it could very well mean that others have served them in this way.
As you can probably tell, none of the aspects of the new groups stands on its own. Group connectivity, cooperative leadership, group process, group organization, and group creative activity are all integral to each other. In one sense, they may be each other functioning in different ways, maybe along different rays.
All these aspects sound a note of synthesis that pervades their intentional specificity. Even given this synthesis, one aspect might stand out from the others in groups functioning now. It is not clear that any existent group is a model for the synthesis of all the aspects discussed in this paper. These groups are new, experimental, embryonic. Also, older, established groups are beginning to manifest some of these aspects. Right now, it makes more sense to observe these aspects beginning to manifest in a variety of ways, rather than attempting to find the group that completely, synthetically manifests all of them.
For example, a business might find a more collaborative leadership model useful, while maintaining a heavy organizational structure. Governments, especially local governments are sometimes great models of solving problems by convening meetings of stakeholders who bring together all dimensions of a problem, thereby using the group antahkarana without calling it that. On the other hand, an educational group might work with distributed leadership and less organizational structure while still using stepwise programed instruction of the individual.
The Aquarian Civilization will be created in that dynamic relationship between contemplation and application, and it is hoped that this contemplation might help in some small way.
You might notice that no other works are cited, and an explanation might be in order. The concepts included in this paper arose in a group setting, using the group antahkarana while employing the words of Alice Bailey and Lucille Cedercrans as inspiring doorways to the wisdom they point to. In turn, this paper is simply a representation of those hours and hours of group contemplation and dialogue that led to insights none of us would have had individually. In that light, we found that these concepts do not have their origin on the written page; they reside (if we can use that word) in the field of wisdom and would, therefore, be difficult to cite. We hope this might serve as an example of an (early) Aquarian group educational effort.
Through these words, Henry Guy is attempting to represent hours of group contemplation and dialogue. These servers involved are too numerous to list here, but his hope is that the intent, quality, and creativity of them might be revealed. He lives in Estes Park, Colorado, USA, where he works with others in the establishment of the Center of Synthesis. He is fortunate to be able to facilitate several videoconference sessions weekly through Resounds. He has been published in the EQ and the Beacon, and has written two books.