Wednesday, 29 March 2017

Harmony is not Equality

A major key to living correctly in the world is to get the balance between male and female right. This is not just the balance between men and women, though that is certainly part of it, but something that goes much deeper than that essential duality and of which it is the reflection. 


For the duality of masculine and feminine is not merely biological but fundamental to the whole of existence. It goes down to the root of manifest reality. Indeed there can be no manifest reality without it. In its basic religious form it can be represented as God (Father) and Nature (Mother) but it might also be described as subject and object, essence and substance, absolute and infinite or spirit and matter, all of which represent the two poles which must be if there it to be anything at all. These two poles derive from primal oneness (God as he is in himself purely as himself) but one must become two, itself and another, to be expressed in creation.

Now this metaphysical truth tells us that the relation between these two, on which depends all creation, is complementary but is not as mathematically equal as at first that might imply. Certainly not in the way believed today. Harmony is not equality, and though in human terms each sex needs the other and is incomplete without the other, there is still a subtle order to the relationship which is one reason we find it so hard to get right, this order either being rebelled against or exploited. The reality is additionally complicated by the fact that men and women, psychologically speaking and as incarnated individuals, are not exclusively masculine or feminine but each includes elements of the other though this is always expressed uniquely through one of the two sexes unless something has gone wrong which in a fallen world is always possible, though that does not make it right. 

Today we can see forces which are distortions of the masculine and feminine principles in operation everywhere. They can be conceived as the outworkings of the basic expanding and contracting forces in the universe, one tending to differentiation and the other back to an undifferentiated state. In a properly functioning society these would be held in balance and work together towards a higher state with the former driving the process and the latter stabilising it. Unfortunately however, because we are now living at a time when connection to the world of true spiritual Form is lost, they are manifesting in a perverted manner with each reacting against the other instead of with the other and neither seeing itself as part of something greater. Because these principles, as channelled through modern human beings, have lost touch with their origins, they are seen only in terms of themselves. That which is part of reality takes itself to be the whole.

Masculine and feminine, like active and receptive which are their counterparts on an abstract plane, are complementary forces and need to be for life to unfold harmoniously as it should. But to imagine them as equal reduces to a quantitative level something that actually exists on a qualitative one. It also ignores the fact, understood in the past but rejected today, that, like active and receptive, the masculine is the primary principle with the feminine coming about as its complementary opposite in the duality of creation. This is represented both in the idea of the Creator God being masculine to whom Creation is feminine and also in the story of Eve being made as a companion for Adam and taken from his side. Archaic stories you might say that have been used to justify oppression, and that is no doubt correct in part, but they also symbolise a deep and abiding truth.

Clearly this idea will not be acceptable to many people today for now we tend to see only the outer aspects of things not to mention that there is so much ego involved in our reaction to anything that it stops us seeing dispassionately. Even people who recognise the complementarity of the sexes rather than their complete equivalence will shy away from accepting that one does come ontologically before the other in the sense that the feminine is the complementary opposite to the masculine rather than the other way around. But I think an honest appraisal of how reality works will show this to be true. I also think that au fond every man and every woman, when not corrupted by egotism, resentment or desire for power, recognises this and knows it accords with deepest truth. Alas, we live in such a degenerate age that few can accept this. And many men who might accept it do so in the wrong way because of egotism; that is to say, they interpret it in the context of egotistical dominance rather than spiritual responsibility seen in the light of God. But the ontological priority of the cosmic masculine is not the same as a moral superiority. Old fashioned notions of courtesy and chivalry have something to teach us in this respect.

The ontological priority of the masculine I speak of here is a 
metaphysical thing that needs to be understood in universal terms. It must be balanced by the fact that woman was created as a companion and other half to man and therefore is, in that sense, fully equal to him. She is also created as his complement so in various situations it is woman who precedes man. This was traditionally understood. But harmony between the sexes will only come when both the reality of male ontological primacy and the reality of complementarity in creation are understood and observed. We have to get both right, and we will do when we respond to life intuitively and not with the ego or unsupported intellect.

Of course, this whole question must be perceived as operating on a general level. When it comes down to individuals other factors, often to do with spiritual maturity, come into play. Thus a woman can teach or lead a man though she will do so as a woman not as a surrogate man if she is to be faithful to archetypal reality and to the truth of her own soul. The modern approach to this problem may correct certain ancient wrongs but unfortunately it has created other, more serious, ones in doing so. It can only be rectified when the metaphysical basis for the division of the sexes is understood.




Wednesday, 22 March 2017

The Great Chain of Being

Proposition: All life is intended to move on a path towards greater knowledge of God. This is the purpose of existence.

The nearer a creature is to God, the more being and awareness of being it has.

So a mouse is superior to a mosquito and a man is superior to a mouse.

What is true for species or groups is also true, if to a lesser degree, for individuals, any one of whom will have greater or lesser fullness of being depending on his or her proximity or openness to God.

Thus, in terms of created beings and expressed reality, there is no such thing as equality.

And yet the same divine potential exists within all.

So Creation can be envisaged as a ladder on which all beings stand at different rungs, higher or lower, and yet it is the same ladder. In order to understand human beings and all forms of life both these factors must be taken into account.

Conclusion: Equality and hierarchy both exist just as oneness and differentiation do but each has its own sphere and neither should be extended to intrude into the sphere of the other. If that happens harmony is broken and truth dismembered. Real equality only exists in terms of being. Immediately you are in the created world there is a hierarchy of consciousness. Alternatively put, human beings consist of spirit, soul and body, all three together. As spirit we are equal but as souls there is greater and lesser, and this continues for as long as there are souls.




Tuesday, 21 March 2017

Saturday, 18 March 2017

Contemporary Ignorance


We live in an age when the average person educated to university level is supposedly more intelligent and more morally aware than ever before. The world is run by such people and they are our artists, scientists and political and business leaders. They represent the cream of humanity at a time when humanity has progressed to its most enlightened stage so far. Why then are human beings today more spiritually ignorant than they have ever been? You may not believe this but it was stated by the Masters who spoke to me (and that was in the 1980s, things are worse now), and seems obvious to anyone who looks at the world through spiritual eyes or a mind receptive to higher truths. Oh yes, we are probably 'nicer' to each other nowadays but we are less aware of the true good than we have ever been, with goodness diminished to meaning little more than treating everyone equally and in a friendly fashion, with its aim seen as increasing worldly happiness while correspondingly reducing suffering with no thought of any greater meaning or purpose to life.

So we are now both more intelligent (again, supposedly) and more ignorant. How is that possible? I suggest it has come about because of a rejection of faith or intuition as means of evaluating basic truths. We rely entirely on unsupported reason as a guide to the understanding of life. As our focus on the intellect has increased so we have become more entrenched in our own minds. We are locked inside them, unable to see beyond them to a source of greater truth. We reject tradition because it belongs to the ignorant past and we now know better because we have science. We may indeed know better concerning some areas of life, but only those to do with the immediate physical world. When it comes to truths beyond our everyday experience we assuredly do not know better, and there tradition has a lot to teach us.

We have become arrogant, unable to accept that there is something greater than ourselves. We disguise this with grand sounding phrases about our small position in the universe but the fact is that our ancestors, who saw their world as the very centre of the universe, had a more accurate idea of their place in it because they perceived it in relation to a Creator. Their understanding of inessentials was far less than ours but they grasped the basics. The funny thing is that the most ignorant peasant in the Middle Ages who believed in God had a better understanding of life than the most learned scientist today who does not.

Patterns repeat themselves. Could it be that we have, figuratively speaking, once again gone against the divine command? That is, tasted the forbidden fruit. The thought that science could be regarded as such will be thought absurd but I am not, as such, saying that. What I do say is that it provides a very strong temptation to independent power and knowledge, and we have succumbed to that temptation. We have consequently separated ourselves further out of life and are attempting through technology to make ourselves gods with no thought of the real God. This will, of course, end in failure, probably passing through alienation, despair and madness though we may disguise those from ourselves in various ways and through various means. But that is what it will do, indeed is doing.The only way out is to turn in humility to a higher power and allow ourselves to be guided by that.

Some people conjecture that this is a necessary stage to go through, part of the process that eventually leads us into a deeper spiritual understanding than if we had remained purely passive with regard to the spiritual world and our relation to it. I doubt that. It may have that effect but, like the original Fall, I don't think it was necessary, and that union with God could have been achieved without such a deep and radical separation. But even if I am wrong and it was necessary there is no doubt that the point of return has been reached and we should, without delay, turn our faces back to the spiritual world, realising that that was our origin and should be our goal. For when it comes down to it there is nothing else. Restriction to this world, and to ourselves without the sense of God, is death.

To those who ask why we cannot perceive God if he exists I would reply as follows. Firstly, if we could perceive him we could probably not perceive anything else enough to form our own individual character which is part of what God wants of us since he wants sons and daughters not slaves without minds of their own. Secondly, we cannot perceive him because we have not yet developed those higher faculties which would enable us to do so. To develop these is part of the spiritual path. And thirdly, we cannot perceive him for our own good. We can't even look straight at the sun. How could we see God in our present state without being obliterated? We can see him through his works but to see him directly would be more than overwhelming. Strive, through purifying your heart and pondering his Word, to feel his presence. That is more than enough for anyone in this world. For the rest we have eternity.

Sunday, 12 March 2017

The Theft of Love

One of the major recent triumphs of the left (meaning primarily the spiritual left as in demonic powers and only secondarily those they influence on the cultural left) is the theft and corruption of love.

This chief among spiritual virtues has been hijacked and is now used as a weapon against truth. It has been reduced to a sentimentalised validation of men and women as they are here and now, that is to say as they are as fallen sinners. It has become a means to keep human beings locked into the fallen state and deny them a path of escape. For how can you ever turn to the good and the true if you are supported in your wrongness and not told that it is wrong? When sin is denied as sin or even lauded as virtue what hope is there for the sinner? And if those who draw attention to this are denounced as unloving and portrayed as enemies of humanity, as is often the case, the error is compounded and the way out even more blocked. This is what happens when love is detached from wisdom and truth, and virtues that should operate from within a spiritual perspective are detached from their true source and misapplied to the earthly plane.

Spiritually speaking, all love proceeds from God and human beings can only really know love in the full sense when they direct their hearts and minds towards God. Love without God is either a human emotion bearing within itself the possibility of its opposite or an idea that the subject tries to adapt his behaviour to because he recognises that it defines a good person. These are not necessarily wrong, one has to start somewhere, but they are not the real thing. Real love only comes when the personal will is aligned with the will of God and with that comes wisdom, the wisdom to discern that love is not just a feeling but has a purpose and that purpose is to bring all creation more fully into conscious union with its Creator.

When love is used as a way of diverting man from his true end of union with God then it has been corrupted. When it is restricted to the horizontal plane and not oriented towards the vertical then it has become separated from its source and so is not real love but something else masquerading as that. Love must first be directed vertically, to its source, before it can be properly expressed horizontally. If it does not make this connection then it risks being misapplied and even used against itself which is what is happening today.

It is not love that keeps human beings from fulfilling their real purpose of transcending their identification of themselves as themselves and realising their true nature as sons and daughters of the Most High. It is not love that seeks to make a prison more comfortable instead of giving the prisoner the key to the door and instructions on how to escape. Love does not confirm us in our present state but seeks to bring us up to a higher one. It is not about transient happiness but joy eternal.

Friday, 10 March 2017

Humility

What is the greatest fault of the contemporary spiritual seeker? Actually it is the perennial fault but it is manifested more than ever now due to our current strong focus on self and reluctance to admit that we are fallen beings. It is the idea that we can get to heaven/attain salvation/be enlightened (choose your preferred option) on our own. This idea appears in various forms but is particularly prominent in those paths that emphasise technique and knowledge as a means to attainment or those which dispense with the sense of a personal Creator. That is why the greatest virtue is humility, which can only be acquired by, as my teachers told me, thinking of oneself as the lowest of the low. This is a real attitude to be acquired and not just a snappy catchphrase but it does not mean debasing or devaluing yourself. It is really just a way of getting to the point of not thinking of yourself at all. Humility can be assumed or imitated (and often is) but it can only be a genuine thing when it comes as the result of love and gratitude to the Creator, and realising your utter insignificance in his presence. That doesn’t mean you are without value. You are infinitely precious and worthy but only truly so when you know that you yourself are as nothing and all you are comes from the Creator.

This goes completely against the grain for the modern person (I know, I’m one of them) who likes to believe that he is, through his own efforts, somehow perfectible.  But this is the greatest of illusions. We can indeed become perfect but only through complete surrender to God. There is nothing we can do to bring this about except submit to the higher power that runs the universe.

Become as a child and put your entire faith in your Maker. This sounds demeaning to people today and I am not denying that the concept can be sentimentalized and reduced to an emotional dependency which is not what I am talking about here at all. It is a sad fact that every truth can be perverted and/or trivialized, and though we are required to submit our sense of an autonomous separate self we are not required to surrender good sense, intelligence and personal responsibility. In fact, we will get nowhere without them. So surrender does not mean abandoning our individuality as some spiritual paths mistakenly teach. God wants strong individuals in his kingdom. He wants people who are able to become more and more like him. What it does mean is giving up the notion of oneself as an independent personality who is capable of penetrating to the heart of existence by his own efforts. God made us as individuals but true individuality only blossoms when we are able to let go of our self-centredness and find our real centre in God.

The evolutionary path is long and arduous. The goal is for new born baby spirits, little sparks of consciousness, to grow into godhood. When we are first created in the heavenly worlds we are completely at one with our environment. We cannot distinguish between that and an individual centre. Gradually we separate out from that environment and become aware of ourselves as autonomous beings. That process has reached an extreme now. At this point there is a stage of potential crisis. We can carry on with the separating stage and become more and more entrenched in our own ego, becoming ever less aware of the greater whole outside that, both material and especially spiritual, or we can start the path to completion in which our self reunites with the greater Self, the All Self, of God but does so in full consciousness unlike the beginning phase which was a purely passive one. And this leads to a possible complication. The return to God must be an advance not a retreat by which I mean that going forward is not going back. That is to say, we should not seek to return to a pre-rational stage when we were at one with our surroundings. That may have been blissful but it was the bliss of the baby at her mother's breast, a being totally dependent and without thought or creativity or even love other than a sort of attachment. We have to go on to join the Father in a fully active existence in which we have transcended the limitations of matter but used our experiences in the material world to become fully conscious of spirit. 

And to do this properly there is only one path which is the path of humility for that strikes down the separative ego and opens the soul up to the grace of God thereby lifting it up to his world of light and truth and love.