I recently listened to The 64 Evolutionary Steps by Ra Uru Hu for the first time. Now, I just read Mary Ann Winiger's (unfinished) book, 2027 Global Consciousness Program. Mary Ann was a longtime student of Ra, until his death in 2011. These are two different takes on the Evolutionary Process. They can't both be right. If you can explain how they are both correct models, do let me know.

Here's my take on what appears to have happened:

Ra attempted to explain Awareness Evolution in The 64 Evolutionary Steps in Hexagram order 1-64 (with some minor variations). Ra claimed that a "Round" was 19,364 years, and that "On average the distance between the stages is between 250 and 400 years." This gives an average of ~312 years per gate (for 62 gates, as Ra claimed that some gates (1 & 2, 63 & 64) occurred simultaneously). Ra stated in this course that we are in a Gate 54 theme, moving to a Gate 55 theme in 2027. (Note that Ra's "Round" is at least 800 years shorter than actual Precession of the Equinoxes models, which are generally estimated to be just under 26,000 years.)

Somewhere in the middle of Ra's presentation on The 64 Evolutionary Steps and his Global Cycles Course someone introduced the idea of the Precession of the Equinoxes, to Ra or Mary Ann. For reference, Mary Ann calculated, using Ra's previous teaching, that each step is about 412 years. While this might be a reasonable estimate for its time, this is about 8 years longer than the current software models show for the Precession of the Equinoxes.

Mary Ann then took some previous teaching on Incarnation Crosses and the Precession of the Equinoxes idea and created a (very valuable) spreadsheet on the date ranges for two concurrent Crosses (including the Locks & Keys theme) in each step in the Global Cycle.

Ra took Mary Ann's spreadsheet and used it as the basis of his Global Cycles Course. Ra made the (understandable) mistake of starting at the top of the spreadsheet, with the Lock gates, and applied them to the Key Gates below. He should have started with the Key Gates, and ended on the Lock Gates. Now, teaching is passed down that Locks apply to some Keys in totally different Quarters of the Wheel. Why no one caught this is beyond me. Note: Locks and Keys should share the same lower Trigram.

In addition, in the Global Cycles Course, Ra taught that we are in a Gate 37 theme (no longer gate 54), moving into a Gate 55 theme. This order matches the Precession of the Equinoxes to the Rave Mandala Wheel sequence, and no longer matches the Hexagram numerical 1-64 order previously taught.

Until reading Mary Ann's book, I never paid any attention to her spreadsheet not being a complete "Round." For Mary Ann, she appears to have approximated Ra's "Round" of 19,364 years, which gave her only three-fourth's of the Wheel, at ~412 years per Gate (48 or 49 gates), and despite the contradiction, tries to make a case that 49 gates makes a 'Round."

With the Precession of the Equinoxes, a "Round" is 360 degrees, which is all 64 Gates in the Wheel. At least Ra's average of ~312 years per gate, approximated a round. By comparison, a Solar Year completes a "round" of 64 Gates in approximately 365 days, for an average of 5.7 days per Gate. A Galactic Year is just under 26,000 years, for an average of about 405 years per Gate.

Where were the critical thinking skills of Ra's and Mary Ann's students, all these years, not to press back on this illogic?!? It is time!

Update

Updated: 2026-06-01

Upon republishing this article on this website, I went back to look at the timeline of Ra Uru Hu's teaching, as presented by Jan van den Berg in his biography entitled Ra's Work 2020. I originally looked at the sequence of events from the particular coure dates I encountered. However, it appears the the Global Cycles course was taught multiple times with some of them taught before and some after the 64 Evolutionary Steps course.

While the information in the 64 Evolutionary Steps course is valuable in looking at global themes for each of the gates, the evolutionary sequence is still at odds with the material taught in the Global Cycles course, as far as sequencing of evolution. In addition, the 64 Evolutionary Steps do not have have any mechanical/astronomical ties, in contrast to almost all the rest of Human Design teaching.

My assumption that the 64 Evolutionary Steps course was a more primitive understanding is mistaken. Thus, unless informed otherwise, my present conclusion deduces that the purpose of the course must have been a way to feed Ra's students' appetite for information, rather than as a source for solid and consistent scholarship between the courses. Thus, the flaws I've pointed out in the article still apply.

Timeline

Here is a timeline on some of the teachings of Ra Uru Hu (per Ra's Work 2020, by Jan van den Berg).