The Initiation

Suppose a person has managed to awaken.

They have discovered that their worldview is contingent, learned to recognize some of the fallacies surrounding them, and gained enough independence to investigate reality for themselves. The old authorities have lost their power over them, social norms no longer seem immutable, and the world around them has revealed itself in all its contradictions.

What now?

Unfortunately, Awakening by itself solves practically none of the problems a person will have to face.

Society continues to operate according to the same old rules. States still command enormous resources, companies pursue economic interests, religious organizations spread their teachings, and billions of people continue to live as they did before. No one is obliged to change their behavior just because somewhere another person has finally learned to ask the right questions.

What is more, the awakened person may well discover that it has now become much harder to get along with those around them.

Conversations that once seemed substantial begin to feel pointless. Familiar social rituals become baffling. Attempts to discuss the fundamental basis of human beliefs often end in irritation, incomprehension, or outright hostility.

It is particularly unpleasant to discover that even people who share some of your views have not necessarily arrived at them by the same path.

You may meet someone convinced of the merits of the scientific method who does not understand its principles. You may find a champion of social progress who is horrified by any substantial change. You may encounter a committed free thinker who gladly defends freedom of thought — until those around them start using it in ways they do not like.

And yet, amid this multitude, others can sometimes be found.

People who do not need a detailed explanation of why claims require justification. Who can argue for hours without turning every disagreement into a personal insult. Who feel no need to join the majority at once, but do not regard their own dissent as proof of their superiority, either.

Such encounters may seem perfectly ordinary. After all, humanity is numerous enough that even very rare combinations of qualities can occur more than once.

But to those accustomed to intellectual solitude, they mean something else entirely.

Sometimes just a few conversations are enough to discover in another person not merely a companion in dialogue, but someone of the same rare kind of thinker.

We call such people our own.

But being one of our own and belonging to the Sect are not the same thing.

The Sect is not an accidental gathering of intellectuals, a philosophy club, or a society of people who enjoy discussing unusual questions. There are plenty of other groups for that, and some of them are probably well worth visiting.

We are interested not only in a person's ability to think, but also in what they intend to do with that ability.

After all, one can possess a brilliant intellect and have no will at all. One can understand society's workings exceptionally well, yet spend a lifetime doing nothing but discussing its shortcomings. One can understand the causes of what is happening, foresee the consequences, and even know what actions must be taken — yet never find the resolve to take them.

We do not consider that satisfactory.

Awakening makes liberation possible. Initiation turns that possibility into an obligation.

This is where our requirements begin.

First and foremost, a person must have will.

Not the kind of will that authors of cheap self-help manuals love to talk about, promising extraordinary achievements to anyone who learns to get up early enough. We are not particularly interested in such exercises.

We mean the ability to remain faithful to a consciously made decision even after it stops being pleasurable.

The willingness to keep working on something whose results may not appear for years. The ability to withstand intellectual strain, accept unwelcome conclusions, honor commitments, and not abandon them merely because circumstances have taken a turn for the worse.

We especially value the ability to do what is necessary without constant outside approval.

A person who needs endless reassurance of their own importance is of rather dubious value to us. Not because acknowledging other people's merits does not matter, but because activity that depends entirely on praise tends to stop as soon as the praise disappears.

We prefer people who can carry on with their work even when no one is watching.

The second condition is fidelity to principle.

Every association presupposes something its members have in common. But a mere liking for certain ideas is not enough for the Sect. We expect our principles to have a genuine bearing on the actions of those who declare themselves their adherents.

You cannot endlessly discuss rationalism if your own decisions are made solely under the influence of prejudice. You cannot proclaim intellectual honesty while knowingly spreading lies whenever they prove politically convenient. You cannot call yourself a defender of freedom of inquiry while demanding that others abandon research you find inconvenient.

In any case, you cannot do all this and expect us not to notice.

Of course, people do stray from their principles. One cannot expect perfect consistency from beings whose behavior depends on so many circumstances. But there is a difference between a mistake a person can acknowledge and hypocrisy they claim as a right.

The latter is entirely unacceptable to us.

Still, following principles does not in itself create an organization.

Imagine a dozen exceptionally intelligent, independent, strong-willed people, each with their own beliefs and each intent on acting solely as they see fit.

Perhaps they could have a very entertaining discussion.

But we doubt that would be enough to achieve any particularly significant shared goals.

Society will not transform itself simply because people who understand its flaws are present. That takes coordinated activity, a division of responsibilities, continuity in decision-making, and the ability to subordinate individual actions to a common design.

That is why the Sect has a hierarchy.

We are not ashamed of this, and we have no intention of portraying our organization as a shapeless gathering of equal participants, each of whom supposedly determines everything that happens to the same degree.

We have different levels of belonging, responsibility, trust, and authority.

Some observe our activities from the outside. Others take part in the life of the community. A few gain access to a closer circle, where matters not brought before everyone are decided.

There is nothing unnatural about this.

Practically every sufficiently complex organization has to distinguish between the powers of its members. Even societies that proclaim complete equality often discover that some of their members wield considerably more influence than others.

The difference is that we prefer to acknowledge that such an order exists rather than pretend it does not.

Hierarchy establishes who makes decisions, who is responsible for them, and who is charged with carrying them out. It enables the organization to remain coherent without turning every action into an endless assembly where the very foundations of our common existence must be debated all over again.

Therefore, a willingness to recognize the authority of those above you is an essential part of Initiation.

This is perhaps one of the most uncomfortable requirements for someone who has only just learned to free themselves from other people's authority.

They may find it strange that we first propose rejecting the dogmas imposed by society and then demand submission to our own order.

But there is no contradiction here, despite what a superficial reading might suggest.

To submit because you cannot imagine any other order, and to submit because you have consciously recognized the need for shared discipline, are two entirely different things.

A free person can make a commitment. Indeed, sometimes the ability to honor commitments freely undertaken is what distinguishes them from someone perpetually at the mercy of their momentary desires.

That is why we do not regard discipline as the opposite of freedom.

On the contrary, discipline enables individuals to accomplish things they could never achieve alone.

Of course, this does not mean that every decision made by someone above you is necessarily right. But in a shared undertaking, the right to make the final decision cannot remain indefinitely unresolved. Once discussion has ended and a decision has been made, participants are expected to act in concert rather than return to the argument again and again simply to indulge their own vanity.

We consider the ability to argue a virtue.

Knowing when to end an argument and start acting is one, too.

And here we come to the question that probably interests many observers most of all.

The question of the Leader.

The Sect exists not only through the shared beliefs of its members. For its existence to endure, it needs a center capable of bringing numerous interests, intentions, and actions together in a single direction.

In our symbolism, the Monad represents this unity.

The plurality of members, and the differences in their characters, views, and abilities, remind us of the Dyad. They give rise to contradictions, arguments, and the ceaseless movement of thought. But plurality alone does not make a whole.

Something is needed to make a multitude more than a mere multitude.

In organizational terms, the Leader fulfills this role.

The Leader embodies the Sect's continuity, is the highest authority in its internal order, and has the final say in determining its common direction.

That is why we expect those closest to the Leader to show not merely respect, but a particular loyalty to the Leader as the bearer of the principles the organization has adopted.

From the outside, such an attitude may seem excessive.

Some will probably call it a personality cult. Others will see signs of authoritarianism. Still others will decide that we have lost our minds completely and willingly handed over our independence to some person whom, besides, not everyone has even seen.

We will not be especially surprised by such conclusions.

After all, we do not make much effort to conceal the cultic aspect of our association.

It should be understood, however, that the Leader's authority and possession of absolute knowledge are not the same thing. The laws of physics do not depend on the Leader's orders, mathematical proofs do not become valid through the Leader's approval, and facts do not cease to exist because they happen to be inconvenient to the Leader.

But within the Sect's internal order, the Leader's decision carries the highest binding authority.

In other words, the Leader need not be omniscient to occupy that position. They need only be the person entrusted with determining the direction in which the organization moves.

That said, some of our members claim that the Leader is always right.

Some say this with an entirely serious expression.

We do not consider it necessary to establish every time how sincere they are.

Especially since statements like these can sometimes be quite useful in maintaining order.

But let us return to Initiation itself.

Belonging to the Sect is not determined by desire alone. You cannot simply declare yourself initiated, any more than you can declare yourself an adherent of a philosophical school or an admirer of a particular work of art.

Initiation requires recognition.

And that recognition must come not only from the person themselves, but also from those they intend to join.

We consider this point fundamental.

You may consider yourself intelligent enough to understand our ideas. You may take part in discussions for years, know the community's history, and use all its symbols. You may even sincerely share our aims.

But none of this, by itself, gives you the right to belong to the Inner Circle.

That right is not earned through the length of an acquaintance, passed down by inheritance, or awarded for the number of compliments you have paid.

It is founded on trust.

And, as we know well, trust cannot be demanded simply by declaring yourself worthy of it.

It develops gradually, through shared work, arguments, difficult circumstances, and situations in which a person must choose between their principles and their own convenience.

We come to know one another through how we behave in such situations.

That is precisely why Initiation should not be understood solely as a ceremony, an impressive title, or a symbolic crossing of an imaginary threshold.

The real threshold lies between two states: when a person is merely interested in our community, and when they become part of its inner life.

Crossing it is much harder than it may seem.

What is more, the vast majority of people will never have that opportunity.

And we are perfectly content with that.

We have no desire to turn the Inner Circle into a large organization open to anyone who wants to join. It has taken shape over many years, weathered numerous changes, and retained only a few whose presence has proved especially significant.

Every new person who joins the inner circle is an event for us.

Every departure is a loss whose significance is hard to explain to outsiders.

The outer circle may change continually. People come, talk, argue, disappear, and sometimes return. Some stay for a few days, others for years. For them, the Sect may be an interesting community, a source of news, a place for discussion, or simply an unusual corner of human society.

We ask no more of them.

But the Inner Circle is different.

Its members are bound not only by shared interests, but by a long history of mutual recognition. They know one another in circumstances that remain unknown to most observers. They can count on the help, understanding, and support of those who have undergone similar intellectual and personal trials.

That kind of closeness does not arise from sharing political views alone.

It takes time.

That is precisely why the Inner Circle remains concealed.

Perhaps the word will strike some as overly mystical. But it seems entirely apt to us.

After all, what is concealed need not be supernatural. Sometimes it is simply not meant for outsiders.

We see no need to tell every observer in detail about the inner life of our association, the identities of all those close to us, the nature of their relationships, or the matters they discuss among themselves.

In a certain respect, the very mystery is quite useful.

It gives rise to a whole range of wonderful speculations about our organization.

Some believe the Inner Circle is made up of tremendously influential people. Others think it is a small gathering of eccentric intellectuals. Still others doubt that such a circle exists at all and suspect that our entire hierarchy is an elaborate joke.

We find all these theories rather amusing.

And do not consider it our duty to settle them once and for all.

What is more, a person's response to the unknown is itself of some interest to us. One person prefers to fill the gap at once with their own fantasies. Another declares that any knowledge beyond their reach is fabricated. A third can acknowledge that there are things they do not yet know.

We are more drawn to the last approach.

But Initiation should not be confused with gaining access to some collection of secret truths.

We do not possess a secret chart of the laws of physics unknown to modern science. We do not know the ultimate fate of the Universe. We cannot read other people's minds and, as far as we can tell, do not maintain diplomatic relations with higher beings.

At least, not officially.

But we do possess something we consider far more valuable than revelations of that kind.

We have one another.

Among those close to us are people with different knowledge, abilities, interests, and experience. They are united not by possession of the answer to one single question, but by their ability to investigate together practically any question worth considering.

We do not promise that we already have a ready-made answer to every one of them.

But we do promise not to treat the absence of an answer as grounds to stop searching.

This is one of the most important advantages of belonging to the Sect.

An individual is limited by their own experience, knowledge, time, and abilities. Even the most exceptional talents do not allow a person to be equally well versed in every area of human endeavor.

But a community of people who can trust one another's intellectual honesty can overcome many of these limitations.

When one person lacks knowledge, another may have the necessary expertise. When one falls under the sway of their own prejudices, another can point out the contradiction. When one loses their way, the others can remind them what they were striving for.

This does not make the Sect infallible.

But it makes the Sect far more than the simple sum of its members.

Thus the Monad and the Dyad are joined once again.

The many individual minds retain their differences, yet form a whole capable of possessing continuity, memory, and aims that extend beyond the life of any one person.

In this sense, Initiation is not merely the acquisition of a new social standing.

It is the incorporation of one's own activity into something more enduring than an individual human life.

And here we must touch on one more point.

A person who seeks complete liberation from the world around them sooner or later discovers that absolute independence is practically unattainable. They depend on food, shelter, other people, social institutions, and complex systems whose workings they cannot fully control.

So the question is not so much how to rid oneself of all dependence as how to distinguish between its different forms.

It is one thing to submit to social arrangements whose origins you do not understand and whose necessity you have never examined. It is quite another to consciously join an association whose principles you know, whose aims you share, and whose members have earned your trust.

That is the kind of belonging we offer.

Not the dissolution of the individual into the collective, but the bringing of their capacities into a shared undertaking.

Not the renunciation of one's own will, but its conscious joining with the will of others.

Not the blind worship of authority, but the recognition of an established order and a willingness to serve a common cause.

And the word “serve” does not trouble us in the least.

For some reason, humanity has grown used to thinking of service as necessarily degrading — unless it is directed toward the state, the nation, a religious deity, or some other sufficiently familiar abstraction.

We see no reason why fidelity to consciously chosen principles should be considered less worthy than fidelity to the circumstances of one's birth.

Ultimately, everyone serves something, even if they prefer not to use that word.

Some serve their habits. Some serve public approval. Some devote their lives to accumulating material wealth. Some subordinate their actions to ideas of what is right that they have never examined for themselves.

We prefer to know what we serve.

That is the difference.

Therefore, Initiation demands not only intellectual preparation but also a conscious acceptance of obligations to the Sect. Someone close to us cannot treat its existence merely as entertainment to be enjoyed until something more interesting comes along.

They become responsible for the whole they have recognized themselves as part of.

And the higher their position, the more is expected of them.

After all, it would be rather strange for people claiming membership in an intellectual elite to demand exceptional privileges for themselves while refusing to shoulder exceptional responsibilities.

We do not consider such behavior worthy of the chosen.

Still, one should not imagine that the life of an initiate consists solely of duties, trials, and an endless struggle with their own shortcomings.

In reality, it can be very pleasant.

Few pleasures compare with the opportunity to discuss practically any subject freely with people who can not only understand what you say, but answer with something genuinely interesting. Few kinds of closeness compare with the bond that develops between people who know one another's strengths and weaknesses and feel no need to keep mutual illusions alive.

We value such company.

Perhaps even more than one might expect from people who so insistently proclaim their own rationality.

But there is no particular contradiction here.

Reason does not require people to give up their attachments. It merely helps them understand better why some are worth keeping and others letting go.

And if, over many years, we have managed to find a handful of people whose presence is exceptionally valuable, we have no intention of pretending that this means nothing to us.

That is precisely why we treat the existence of the Inner Circle with such care.

And why we are so cautious about admitting new members.

An outsider may think that our organization surrounds itself with unjustified secrecy, exaggerates its own importance, and makes excessive demands of those who wish to join the inner circle.

They may even find it unpleasant to discover that our attitude toward people is not determined solely by the fact that they are interested in us.

We readily accept that reaction.

But we have no intention of changing the Sect's structure merely to make it appealing to everyone.

After all, we did not create it for everyone.

We created it for our own.

And if the reader who has made it this far feels an unusual desire to find out what lies beyond the outer circle, we can only welcome that curiosity.

But curiosity is not enough.

Neither are knowledge, eloquence, political affinity, or the ability to make an impression as an extraordinary person.

You will have to prove that there really is something behind all this worth paying attention to.

It may take years.

It may never happen at all.

But if one day a person finds themselves among the few we recognize as our own, the need to explain the meaning of Initiation will largely disappear.

They will already know.

And then one final question will arise before them.

What, exactly, have we traveled this whole way for?

Why investigate the nature of the World, dispel Delusions, strive for Awakening, and unite the chosen under a common principle?

Was it all merely to create another closed society whose members will endlessly discuss their own superiority?

That prospect does not strike us as sufficiently appealing.

The Sect exists not merely to understand the World.

It exists to transform it.