Posts
*******
I am not convinced that Jesus was ever a formal, appointed "rabbi" of the traditional schools of Judaism. In the Gospels, over and over, his "enemies" appear as the "scribes and Pharisees." The latter were traditionalist and orthodox people, "people of the book," which Jesus was clearly not.:) Also, there are some historical sources that claim that the term "rabbi" was not used to designate an official, formal, teacher or leader in Judaism until after the death of Jesus; so, it might be an anachronism.
Jesus was clearly not orthodox. In some ways, he was just as clearly antiorthodox, as when, in Matthew 5, he in effect denied the infallibility of the "written" Scriptures and recommended that we follow the heart.
Other texts, such as the famous John 17:3, imply that he might have been a gnostic (mystic). For there, in prayer, Jesus says, "This is timeless life, to know (Greek, form of gnodsein) you, the only true God, and the one whom you emanated, Jesus Christ." This kind of thinking/talking was purest mysticism.
I am not convinced that there is any historical data whatsoever that proves that Jesus was married. If he was, great! Also, if he was not, great! His beautiful teachings of Love are not altered one way or the other. I know that, since the "tempest in a teacup" caused in the official Catholic Church recently, many people will argue to the death that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalen. I believe, and remember, that they were the closest of friends. But there is no solid, good, scholarly evidence that they were married. In a gnostic work, the "Gospel of Phillip," it says that Jesus used to kiss her on the mouth with fair regularity, so they were not only friends, but intimate friends. (This Gospel says even that the other disciples were jealous!) And Mary Magdalen was recognized, in place of Peter, as the founder of the later church, by gnostics of many traditions. And this fact is also very impressive.
I know and agree that Jesus was no carpenter; only Joseph was. And the people said that he was a carpenter; but the people also said that he "had a demon." So, you cannot, as always, rely on the crowd to prove anything! Yet there is consistent scholarly consensus that he was no carpenter, popular myth to the contrary.:)
Yes, the orthodox, official Church was powerfully misogynistic, and this alone is a good enough reason-- as if another were needed-- to reject the leadership of the official and orthodox Church. (There are many other good reasons for rejecting, even renouncing, this Church. For one, it mistakes Jehovah for the sweet Lord of Love!:)
Jesus rejected the title of "messiah." There was a good, sound historical reason for this: The Jewish "messiah" was predicted to be a powerful and bloody general who would liberate the Jewish nation by spilling the blood of tens of thousands of Romans and other Jewish "enemies." This nightmarish, hideous "prophecy" did not at all fit the gentle teacher of Love.
The unreliability of the canonical Gospels, which went through many hands of many scribes, is indicated by the fact that, in Mark, the oldest of the official Gospels (including also Matthew, Luke, and John), Jesus tells Pilate that he is the "messiah." The "messiah" was nothing more than a popular Jewish superstition; Jesus did not buy into it at all, and certainly never made any claims to be the messiah. Like the word "rabbi," this word is also an anachronism; the word was not even used during the life of Jesus, but came along later.
The Greek word khristos, "Christ," is much more than a mere translation of the Hebrew mashiahh, or "messiah." Like "Buddha," in Sanskrit, the word "Christ" referred to a level of enlightenment, as the "anointed" one-- "anointed" by the Spirit (God or Love). But when Christianity historically abandoned many Jewish customs, holidays, and Levitical requirements of the Law, such as sacrifice, it somehow clinged tenaciously to the doctrine of the messiah-- in some ways, the most harmful of all. (Maybe this appealed to the Church because it was ruled by the lower nature.)
*******
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
"Ego" and Pneumarium
*******
We did not invent the concept of the ignoring or dissolution of the tyranny of the "ego." "Ego" is used a bit differently in spirituality than in psychology. "Ego" is the word used correctly by mystics from every tradition, and it has been used by Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and others.
In spirituality, it means the lower, feardominated self, the merely "humanimal" self. This is the area of the mind that the people of Love and enlightenment want to bring under the control of the "higher Self" or Soul, and to bring both under the regulation of the "highest Self," the Spirit of Love. The terminology can be a bit confusing at first, but never fear: The Way of Love does not recommend selfannihilation, but (sometimes radical) Selftransformation!
We gather at the Pneumarium because this is no easy task, and is made only much more difficult when we seek to "fly solo.":( This is why Sufis, and other mystics, have, for millennia, gathered together in small groups as "extended families." [Please see the little article in the latest uld ("Universal Love Digest")] We do not want you to come to our gatherings when you are sick, as this is not the best way to love either yourself or others. But when you are well, our gatherings are a splendid way to love, and to serve, others!:)
*******
We did not invent the concept of the ignoring or dissolution of the tyranny of the "ego." "Ego" is used a bit differently in spirituality than in psychology. "Ego" is the word used correctly by mystics from every tradition, and it has been used by Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and others.
In spirituality, it means the lower, feardominated self, the merely "humanimal" self. This is the area of the mind that the people of Love and enlightenment want to bring under the control of the "higher Self" or Soul, and to bring both under the regulation of the "highest Self," the Spirit of Love. The terminology can be a bit confusing at first, but never fear: The Way of Love does not recommend selfannihilation, but (sometimes radical) Selftransformation!
We gather at the Pneumarium because this is no easy task, and is made only much more difficult when we seek to "fly solo.":( This is why Sufis, and other mystics, have, for millennia, gathered together in small groups as "extended families." [Please see the little article in the latest uld ("Universal Love Digest")] We do not want you to come to our gatherings when you are sick, as this is not the best way to love either yourself or others. But when you are well, our gatherings are a splendid way to love, and to serve, others!:)
*******
The "Indigo" Children
*******
Each and every generation wants to believe that it is "special," especially in a cosmic sense. This is an action of "overcompensation." People need and create this when feeling low selfesteem. And, of course, parents are often desperate that their children be "special" in some positive, life-affirming way.
This is where the myth of "indigo children" originates. Parents as well as kids want, and perhaps need, to believe in it; both are strongly if unconsciously motivated to be "true believers."
The idea is that the coming generation of kids-- those born in the previous few years, and during the years to come, are "highly advanced and spiritual" Souls. It is an idea that brings joy! It can be breath-taking!:):)
But is there any objective evidence that kids born during the last few years are "born more spiritual or advanced" than Souls that have preceded them to earth? No, there is no evidence.
The belief is not logical, or logically demonstrated. It is an emotional, sometimes religious, idea. As was true of every generation in the entire history of the world, some kids come here "already spiritual" due to good karma, and most, as always and usual, have come here for spiritual growth.
The idea of "indigo" children also posits the untenable position that these "special" kids do not need as much teaching, discipline, and structure, which takes an unwelcome load off the backs of parents. In the modern generation (those born during the past few years), there is zero solid evidence that kids are smarter, stronger, quicker, wiser, or "more spiritual" than are older people. Every generation, including this one, contains very "special" people; indeed, all human beings are "special." But the myth of indigo children is only an attempt to be "extraordinary," and this idea is usually embraced by people who are feeling low selfesteem. All that the idea usually does, in so many lives, is boost the ego-- which, in itself, is antispiritual.
Love does not discriminate. It treats every generation alike, with an even hand.
So, let's awaken to the realization that some kids are "born" with the wide spectrum of karmic influences that affect us all. Some were stupid or criminal in past lives, others tender, wise, and even brilliant!:) But let us show care not to slide down the slippery slope to superiorism.
For those who practice arrogance prove their lack of real spirituality, which supports, not "being above the crowd," but humility. Jesus, in his notorious association with "sinners," ordinary people, was a good lesson for all of us.:)
*******
Each and every generation wants to believe that it is "special," especially in a cosmic sense. This is an action of "overcompensation." People need and create this when feeling low selfesteem. And, of course, parents are often desperate that their children be "special" in some positive, life-affirming way.
This is where the myth of "indigo children" originates. Parents as well as kids want, and perhaps need, to believe in it; both are strongly if unconsciously motivated to be "true believers."
The idea is that the coming generation of kids-- those born in the previous few years, and during the years to come, are "highly advanced and spiritual" Souls. It is an idea that brings joy! It can be breath-taking!:):)
But is there any objective evidence that kids born during the last few years are "born more spiritual or advanced" than Souls that have preceded them to earth? No, there is no evidence.
The belief is not logical, or logically demonstrated. It is an emotional, sometimes religious, idea. As was true of every generation in the entire history of the world, some kids come here "already spiritual" due to good karma, and most, as always and usual, have come here for spiritual growth.
The idea of "indigo" children also posits the untenable position that these "special" kids do not need as much teaching, discipline, and structure, which takes an unwelcome load off the backs of parents. In the modern generation (those born during the past few years), there is zero solid evidence that kids are smarter, stronger, quicker, wiser, or "more spiritual" than are older people. Every generation, including this one, contains very "special" people; indeed, all human beings are "special." But the myth of indigo children is only an attempt to be "extraordinary," and this idea is usually embraced by people who are feeling low selfesteem. All that the idea usually does, in so many lives, is boost the ego-- which, in itself, is antispiritual.
Love does not discriminate. It treats every generation alike, with an even hand.
So, let's awaken to the realization that some kids are "born" with the wide spectrum of karmic influences that affect us all. Some were stupid or criminal in past lives, others tender, wise, and even brilliant!:) But let us show care not to slide down the slippery slope to superiorism.
For those who practice arrogance prove their lack of real spirituality, which supports, not "being above the crowd," but humility. Jesus, in his notorious association with "sinners," ordinary people, was a good lesson for all of us.:)
*******
Death and Learning
*******
When a person "dies in her sins," as all people must leave this world in a state of imperfection, she picks up right where she left off. This is why a desperate suicide is such a futile effort. You cannot "run" from or "escape" your imperfections by dying. If you fail a "test" on earth, God (Love) does what any good teacher does: She gives the same test again. So, the next time that you come to earth, the next time your Soul is sent here from the Homeworld ("heaven"), you will again meet the same Souls as you knew previously, and you will have to work out precisely the same problems. If, for example, you hate another, with seething and relentless hatred, that person might be your spouse. (Love can as easily, and more positively, bind you to a Soulmate, and that is much more pleasant.)
All people, from one perspective, "die in their sins." But, from the view of grace, all our sins are forgiven. So, from the view of God (Love), we do not die "in our sins," but in a forgiven state of purity.
But this is not "earned" purity, but purity bestowed by grace. If, although living in grace, we continue to hold fear or its twin, hatred, in our heart, then we must pick up and return to "school," at exactly the "exam" that we failed before.
*******
When a person "dies in her sins," as all people must leave this world in a state of imperfection, she picks up right where she left off. This is why a desperate suicide is such a futile effort. You cannot "run" from or "escape" your imperfections by dying. If you fail a "test" on earth, God (Love) does what any good teacher does: She gives the same test again. So, the next time that you come to earth, the next time your Soul is sent here from the Homeworld ("heaven"), you will again meet the same Souls as you knew previously, and you will have to work out precisely the same problems. If, for example, you hate another, with seething and relentless hatred, that person might be your spouse. (Love can as easily, and more positively, bind you to a Soulmate, and that is much more pleasant.)
All people, from one perspective, "die in their sins." But, from the view of grace, all our sins are forgiven. So, from the view of God (Love), we do not die "in our sins," but in a forgiven state of purity.
But this is not "earned" purity, but purity bestowed by grace. If, although living in grace, we continue to hold fear or its twin, hatred, in our heart, then we must pick up and return to "school," at exactly the "exam" that we failed before.
*******
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
The Church and Your Spiritual Journey
*******
A "franciscan," to me, is a person who loves and admires, and follows, each in her own limited, often small, ways, the great mystic of Assissi.
(Btw, the name of this Italian town is not pronounced like "a sissy," as most mangle it; it is pronounced "ah-seize'-ee.") I do greatly love and respect all life, and must admit to a preference for the humbler, more helpless forms, such as the bunny that you mention. Sorry that poor little Brother Rabbit did not remain on earth, but I believe that he has his own "heaven," or afterlife. [Rabbit brains are quite complex; they are definitely "sentient" (selfaware) beings.]
Re your cat, he also deserves life, comfort, and respect as a living being. But he is trying hard to remind you that he is not made for indoor life. No creature is, with the exception of perhaps some human beings. All creatures demand the freedom to live outside under the blue sky, or the stars at night. It is possible for you to love and provide for him, while at the same time, giving him the freedom that he is demanding. He is deliberately refusing to live by your "indoor" rules, hoping that you will get his message.:)
Re the church: In the ancient Scriptures, the word "church" was ekklesia. It did not mean a "building," but a small group (often ten or fewer) who gathered on a regular basis to discuss and share the Love of (the) God(dess). Jesus did not even care enough to instruct his followers about how to build a "church-building." In fact, it is my belief that it was his plan for his disciples to meet together in homes (or yards, or garages, basements, etc.). This is what all the earliest Christians did. And they did it successfully during the most rapid growth of the church; they did this for nearly four centuries.
It was, historically, only after the so-called Great Corruption (starting c. 313) that the first "Church-building" was constructed. By this time, the church was no longer a family of Love, but an impersonal and cold "institution." It had ballooned out of control, into a monster of a political and economic "kingdom" of its own.
Why did Jesus not instruct his followers about church-buildings? Because he knew what you are beginning to discover: A Church-building means the acquisition of real estate, and that means the collection of money-- often, "big bucks"! And that attracts, often creates, corruption, greed, and dishonesty. As long as Jesus' followers met, like him and his disciples, on mountains, in fields, in the market, or in private homes, there was no possibility (no motive) for corruption; they all lived purely, sincerely, as a family of Love.
Modern "superchurches" do not please God, for God is Love. Larger churches are egobased attempts to impress the community, and have nothing to do with worship. Even more "liberal" churches, with all their goodness and honesty, have fallen for the lie that "bigger is better," the very foundation of destructive materialism. This is why we meet together here in our garage; we have no plans ever to build any kind of church-building, because that is far from the actual instructions of Jesus Christ.
Adamaria tells me that the real estate market is a current nightmare of petrification and inaction. This can be a good time for buyers, but is a miserable cycle for sellers. I have spoken with members of organized churches, about my feelings, about even their becoming a completely "independent" church. But, right now, I'm afraid everyone is in the "headlock" of organizationalism. This was the beginning of the end for the organized, orthodox Church (Catholic) of the first two centuries.
But neither Catholics nor Protestants learned from this abysmal and sad invitation to corruption. And today, even very liberal people-- for whom I have the greatest Love and respect-- do not, perhaps can not, hear this message.
So, I have been forced to do what the Lord/Lady of Love has commanded, and started an informal (very relaxed) "church" here. We do not even call ourselves a "church," as that term is often misunderstood to mean organized, or orthodox, religion. And we are anything but orthodox!:) and we do not want to become "organized," as that tends to "organize out" all the spontaneity and naturalness from our relationship with Infinity.
So, we hold together no formal dogma, we recognize no human leader, and we are not a "church." But we are what a "church" should be-- a family of Love, an extended spiritual family.
You are, of course, invited to join us at any time. Life never stands still, which means that it demands change, always change. The only factor in life that does not change is change itself!:) we are planning to gather at a park, about five minutes from here, on May 11. We are going to meet here first, at eleven am, and go together to the park.
Your coming here, and bringing along some of our dear friends from your area, would be a dream come true for us! I am thinking especially of a few others.:):) What a great delight, and deep pleasure, that would be!:) But you are under no obligation, dear sister. You must follow, with integrity, your own personal and interior Light, no matter what anyone else says, or does! For to have this kind of interior guidance is a brilliant and beautiful blessing. The Buddha said, "Be a lamp unto yourself," and this is also what Jesus wanted. If there is ever any way in which I can be of assistance in the discovery of your most important interior journey, just say the word! I am here for you, dear friend.
*******
A "franciscan," to me, is a person who loves and admires, and follows, each in her own limited, often small, ways, the great mystic of Assissi.
(Btw, the name of this Italian town is not pronounced like "a sissy," as most mangle it; it is pronounced "ah-seize'-ee.") I do greatly love and respect all life, and must admit to a preference for the humbler, more helpless forms, such as the bunny that you mention. Sorry that poor little Brother Rabbit did not remain on earth, but I believe that he has his own "heaven," or afterlife. [Rabbit brains are quite complex; they are definitely "sentient" (selfaware) beings.]
Re your cat, he also deserves life, comfort, and respect as a living being. But he is trying hard to remind you that he is not made for indoor life. No creature is, with the exception of perhaps some human beings. All creatures demand the freedom to live outside under the blue sky, or the stars at night. It is possible for you to love and provide for him, while at the same time, giving him the freedom that he is demanding. He is deliberately refusing to live by your "indoor" rules, hoping that you will get his message.:)
Re the church: In the ancient Scriptures, the word "church" was ekklesia. It did not mean a "building," but a small group (often ten or fewer) who gathered on a regular basis to discuss and share the Love of (the) God(dess). Jesus did not even care enough to instruct his followers about how to build a "church-building." In fact, it is my belief that it was his plan for his disciples to meet together in homes (or yards, or garages, basements, etc.). This is what all the earliest Christians did. And they did it successfully during the most rapid growth of the church; they did this for nearly four centuries.
It was, historically, only after the so-called Great Corruption (starting c. 313) that the first "Church-building" was constructed. By this time, the church was no longer a family of Love, but an impersonal and cold "institution." It had ballooned out of control, into a monster of a political and economic "kingdom" of its own.
Why did Jesus not instruct his followers about church-buildings? Because he knew what you are beginning to discover: A Church-building means the acquisition of real estate, and that means the collection of money-- often, "big bucks"! And that attracts, often creates, corruption, greed, and dishonesty. As long as Jesus' followers met, like him and his disciples, on mountains, in fields, in the market, or in private homes, there was no possibility (no motive) for corruption; they all lived purely, sincerely, as a family of Love.
Modern "superchurches" do not please God, for God is Love. Larger churches are egobased attempts to impress the community, and have nothing to do with worship. Even more "liberal" churches, with all their goodness and honesty, have fallen for the lie that "bigger is better," the very foundation of destructive materialism. This is why we meet together here in our garage; we have no plans ever to build any kind of church-building, because that is far from the actual instructions of Jesus Christ.
Adamaria tells me that the real estate market is a current nightmare of petrification and inaction. This can be a good time for buyers, but is a miserable cycle for sellers. I have spoken with members of organized churches, about my feelings, about even their becoming a completely "independent" church. But, right now, I'm afraid everyone is in the "headlock" of organizationalism. This was the beginning of the end for the organized, orthodox Church (Catholic) of the first two centuries.
But neither Catholics nor Protestants learned from this abysmal and sad invitation to corruption. And today, even very liberal people-- for whom I have the greatest Love and respect-- do not, perhaps can not, hear this message.
So, I have been forced to do what the Lord/Lady of Love has commanded, and started an informal (very relaxed) "church" here. We do not even call ourselves a "church," as that term is often misunderstood to mean organized, or orthodox, religion. And we are anything but orthodox!:) and we do not want to become "organized," as that tends to "organize out" all the spontaneity and naturalness from our relationship with Infinity.
So, we hold together no formal dogma, we recognize no human leader, and we are not a "church." But we are what a "church" should be-- a family of Love, an extended spiritual family.
You are, of course, invited to join us at any time. Life never stands still, which means that it demands change, always change. The only factor in life that does not change is change itself!:) we are planning to gather at a park, about five minutes from here, on May 11. We are going to meet here first, at eleven am, and go together to the park.
Your coming here, and bringing along some of our dear friends from your area, would be a dream come true for us! I am thinking especially of a few others.:):) What a great delight, and deep pleasure, that would be!:) But you are under no obligation, dear sister. You must follow, with integrity, your own personal and interior Light, no matter what anyone else says, or does! For to have this kind of interior guidance is a brilliant and beautiful blessing. The Buddha said, "Be a lamp unto yourself," and this is also what Jesus wanted. If there is ever any way in which I can be of assistance in the discovery of your most important interior journey, just say the word! I am here for you, dear friend.
*******
The House-churches
*******
We have started a house-church here, just like the ones that were a part of the earliest churches of Jesus Christ and the apostle Paul. Another friend in America is also going to start one, in a different area of the country. My friend David in India has had one as well for about two years. Please ask him about his. His ema is:
lacindia@rediffmail.com
It is a bad mistake for the church to become involved with money or with the purchase of expensive real estate. Our God of pure Love wants to keep His church simple, and does not want it to be a burden for the poor.
*******
We have started a house-church here, just like the ones that were a part of the earliest churches of Jesus Christ and the apostle Paul. Another friend in America is also going to start one, in a different area of the country. My friend David in India has had one as well for about two years. Please ask him about his. His ema is:
lacindia@rediffmail.com
It is a bad mistake for the church to become involved with money or with the purchase of expensive real estate. Our God of pure Love wants to keep His church simple, and does not want it to be a burden for the poor.
*******
Monday, April 28, 2008
House-churches
*******
The first churches of Jesus Christ were very poor. We are also poor in the U.S. But we have discovered, by much serious research, that the earliest churches did not have "Church-buildings." Instead, they met in small groups, in homes of members. We have been gathering here at our home for nearly six years, and have had no problems. God does not want the church to get into debt. In fact, a church should handle as little money as possible, since "the love of money is a root of all evil," as the Scriptures say. So, do you have a home in which you could come together, and save your poor sisters and brothers the money needed for a church? We do not need churches; we need only the Spirit of Christ's Love in our hearts.:)
*******
May the great and sweet Lord of gracious Love continue to bless you, and your work with Love Ministries in Kenya.:)
Love, Joy, and Peace,
Richard Francis,
Love Ministries, usa
The first churches of Jesus Christ were very poor. We are also poor in the U.S. But we have discovered, by much serious research, that the earliest churches did not have "Church-buildings." Instead, they met in small groups, in homes of members. We have been gathering here at our home for nearly six years, and have had no problems. God does not want the church to get into debt. In fact, a church should handle as little money as possible, since "the love of money is a root of all evil," as the Scriptures say. So, do you have a home in which you could come together, and save your poor sisters and brothers the money needed for a church? We do not need churches; we need only the Spirit of Christ's Love in our hearts.:)
*******
May the great and sweet Lord of gracious Love continue to bless you, and your work with Love Ministries in Kenya.:)
Love, Joy, and Peace,
Richard Francis,
Love Ministries, usa
Sunday, April 27, 2008
The Ego
*******
The ego has a place, often, several times, in the incarnational history of the Soul. For It might incarnate several times. It is counterproductive to see the ego as an "enemy," and it is not. It is our friend and teacher. But the ego is not a direct creation of God (Love).
Instead, it develops in response to karma and to earthly environments.
Since both these "mothers" of ego are illusion, so is the ego. It disappears at the death of the physical body, having served its entire purpose. Like the body, the ego is an "instrument" created for dealing with this everyday world of illusion. To use the words of the Docetic Jesus, it is a "phantom in a phantomworld." Just as we work out of Love for our bodies to keep them strong and healthy, even though they are but projections of Mind, we also must strive for psychological wellness, balance, moderation, and a Lovebased mind.
The "ego" in psychology is a little different from the "ego" of spirituality. For in psychology, if you do not have a "strong enough" ego, you suffer. But a major quest of spirituality (not religion) is to weaken the very strong ego.
Why? Because too much, or too strong, ego prevents the Spirit of Love from occupying the mind. Both ego and Spirit cannot dominate or control the mind simultaneously. "Ego" is Greek for "self," or, "I am." In metaphysics and spirituality, the word "self" has also more than one definition. There are, for example, in addition to the egoself (your everyday identity; the name on your birthcertificate and driverslicense), the "higher" Self (Soul) and "highest Self" (Spirit or Lovemind).
The mystic does not simply study the Lovemind or Lovespirit. Instead, pursuing enlightenment, she seeks actually to exchange her ego-identity for full identification with the Lovespirit (God).
Is it the goal of spirituality to "transcend" the ego? Yes, and it is viable. The ego is never the "enemy" of the spiritual being; instead, it is her teacher. As spiritual beings, we must remember that we are minds, not merely bodies. The ego is that part of mind that fully identifies with a particular body in spacetime. But these bodies, although we love, respect, and care for them, are not our true "selves."
For our truest "Self" is the Mind, unattached to any body. NOTE: The "mind" is not the "brain." The brain is within the body and is sustained by it, for it is a physical organ.
But the Mind is your immaterial, nonphysical self. It is your Soul. It existed before this life, and after this life, will continue to exist.
It is birthless, deathless, and timeless. So, once we begin to identify "my Self" as "my Soul," we have entered the "timeless life" promised by Jesus and the other great mysticsaints and masterteachers.
Knowing that you are not this body allows for the creation of powerful detachment. What affects the body need not affect, harm, or hurt, you, or yourself. That explains why, even though we age, we often feel "about the same" inside; the Mind, or Soulmind, does not age, is unaffected by time. but the body is not timeless; only the Soul is.
The ego is often a loud, arrogant braggert. It loves the spotlight, and laps up as much attention and notice as possible. Both Jesus and the Buddha renounced this kind of nonsense, which is the result of selfhatred-- not, as it seems, "too much selflove." Jesus taught that, if we receive rewards (he was speaking here of fame) from human beings, we have no reward with the "heavenly Father." (Mt. 6:1)
That is, the cost of fame is the eradication of all afterlife rewards.
To get earthly fame is like trading nuggets of gold and diamond for clumps of mud!
Why, then, do even "spiritual" people reach for, cultivate, and welcome fame? The truly spiritual do not. For them, fame is the worst possible consequence. So, we want to publicize the Way, but to make sure to keep the self (ego) out of the spotlight and the headlines.:) This can be a tricky and delicate balance. But it is mandatory, not optional, for the truly spiritual person. She wants,for example, for her students to talk about the Way, but not about her personally. Anyone who is eager for, and grabbing, the headlines, or fame, has proved her deep absence or lack of real spirituality. For each being is of immeasurable and limitless value. Anyone crying out for personal attention is trying to find validation in others; when we see this lack, we can be absolutely certain that a person is not enlightened. This is the simple "acid test" that every true spiritual teacher must pass!:)
Again, ego is not "evil." It is simply illusion; it is the dreamself occupying the dreamworld. Ego is part of maya or illusion. So, it follows that, she who takes the ego too seriously, or she who mistakes it for the "self," is not enlightened.
*******
The ego has a place, often, several times, in the incarnational history of the Soul. For It might incarnate several times. It is counterproductive to see the ego as an "enemy," and it is not. It is our friend and teacher. But the ego is not a direct creation of God (Love).
Instead, it develops in response to karma and to earthly environments.
Since both these "mothers" of ego are illusion, so is the ego. It disappears at the death of the physical body, having served its entire purpose. Like the body, the ego is an "instrument" created for dealing with this everyday world of illusion. To use the words of the Docetic Jesus, it is a "phantom in a phantomworld." Just as we work out of Love for our bodies to keep them strong and healthy, even though they are but projections of Mind, we also must strive for psychological wellness, balance, moderation, and a Lovebased mind.
The "ego" in psychology is a little different from the "ego" of spirituality. For in psychology, if you do not have a "strong enough" ego, you suffer. But a major quest of spirituality (not religion) is to weaken the very strong ego.
Why? Because too much, or too strong, ego prevents the Spirit of Love from occupying the mind. Both ego and Spirit cannot dominate or control the mind simultaneously. "Ego" is Greek for "self," or, "I am." In metaphysics and spirituality, the word "self" has also more than one definition. There are, for example, in addition to the egoself (your everyday identity; the name on your birthcertificate and driverslicense), the "higher" Self (Soul) and "highest Self" (Spirit or Lovemind).
The mystic does not simply study the Lovemind or Lovespirit. Instead, pursuing enlightenment, she seeks actually to exchange her ego-identity for full identification with the Lovespirit (God).
Is it the goal of spirituality to "transcend" the ego? Yes, and it is viable. The ego is never the "enemy" of the spiritual being; instead, it is her teacher. As spiritual beings, we must remember that we are minds, not merely bodies. The ego is that part of mind that fully identifies with a particular body in spacetime. But these bodies, although we love, respect, and care for them, are not our true "selves."
For our truest "Self" is the Mind, unattached to any body. NOTE: The "mind" is not the "brain." The brain is within the body and is sustained by it, for it is a physical organ.
But the Mind is your immaterial, nonphysical self. It is your Soul. It existed before this life, and after this life, will continue to exist.
It is birthless, deathless, and timeless. So, once we begin to identify "my Self" as "my Soul," we have entered the "timeless life" promised by Jesus and the other great mysticsaints and masterteachers.
Knowing that you are not this body allows for the creation of powerful detachment. What affects the body need not affect, harm, or hurt, you, or yourself. That explains why, even though we age, we often feel "about the same" inside; the Mind, or Soulmind, does not age, is unaffected by time. but the body is not timeless; only the Soul is.
The ego is often a loud, arrogant braggert. It loves the spotlight, and laps up as much attention and notice as possible. Both Jesus and the Buddha renounced this kind of nonsense, which is the result of selfhatred-- not, as it seems, "too much selflove." Jesus taught that, if we receive rewards (he was speaking here of fame) from human beings, we have no reward with the "heavenly Father." (Mt. 6:1)
That is, the cost of fame is the eradication of all afterlife rewards.
To get earthly fame is like trading nuggets of gold and diamond for clumps of mud!
Why, then, do even "spiritual" people reach for, cultivate, and welcome fame? The truly spiritual do not. For them, fame is the worst possible consequence. So, we want to publicize the Way, but to make sure to keep the self (ego) out of the spotlight and the headlines.:) This can be a tricky and delicate balance. But it is mandatory, not optional, for the truly spiritual person. She wants,for example, for her students to talk about the Way, but not about her personally. Anyone who is eager for, and grabbing, the headlines, or fame, has proved her deep absence or lack of real spirituality. For each being is of immeasurable and limitless value. Anyone crying out for personal attention is trying to find validation in others; when we see this lack, we can be absolutely certain that a person is not enlightened. This is the simple "acid test" that every true spiritual teacher must pass!:)
Again, ego is not "evil." It is simply illusion; it is the dreamself occupying the dreamworld. Ego is part of maya or illusion. So, it follows that, she who takes the ego too seriously, or she who mistakes it for the "self," is not enlightened.
*******
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Inviting Love In
*******
The Christ of pure Love does not "force her/himself" upon anyone. She/He is a very gentle and unobtrusive, noninvasive, nonintrusive Being.
She/He allows us to use the great gift of free will in designing our lives. So, when we "invite her/him in," we are not inviting someone from outside. Christ does not come from outside. This is simply a symbolic Way of inviting the Lovespirit to become active, to express through our lives. Only extreme literalists, in ignorance, assume that Christ is "outside," and must transfer to a different spatial location.
Goddess/God acts within the mind-- and no one would deny that. And Christ is part of Goddess/God. "Christ" is one of the many names of Love.
*******
The Christ of pure Love does not "force her/himself" upon anyone. She/He is a very gentle and unobtrusive, noninvasive, nonintrusive Being.
She/He allows us to use the great gift of free will in designing our lives. So, when we "invite her/him in," we are not inviting someone from outside. Christ does not come from outside. This is simply a symbolic Way of inviting the Lovespirit to become active, to express through our lives. Only extreme literalists, in ignorance, assume that Christ is "outside," and must transfer to a different spatial location.
Goddess/God acts within the mind-- and no one would deny that. And Christ is part of Goddess/God. "Christ" is one of the many names of Love.
*******
Friday, April 25, 2008
The Use of Words
*******
We do not "worry" about the ego. Words can be used to find, and to fix, rational solutions, or they can simply "beat an idea to death.":) We use words for only understanding and communication. The most important ideas in the world are quite beyond words anyway. The great sage Lao Tzu set forth this important principle: "She who says, does not know; she who knows, does not say." We need not be fanatical, or take an interior vow of silence. But neither need we swing to the opposite pole, imagining that we "have all the answers.' in a "flurry" of words" As usual, the Enlightenment Path is between these extremes.
*******
We do not "worry" about the ego. Words can be used to find, and to fix, rational solutions, or they can simply "beat an idea to death.":) We use words for only understanding and communication. The most important ideas in the world are quite beyond words anyway. The great sage Lao Tzu set forth this important principle: "She who says, does not know; she who knows, does not say." We need not be fanatical, or take an interior vow of silence. But neither need we swing to the opposite pole, imagining that we "have all the answers.' in a "flurry" of words" As usual, the Enlightenment Path is between these extremes.
*******
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)