history


And on each of its circles there was seated a Siren on the upper side,

Carried round, and uttering a single sound on one pitch.

But the whole of them, being eight, composed a single harmony.

–Plato

………………………………………………………………..

How can God be said to be in a place, since he is present everywhere and in all things?

And where is his special abode in the world ?

Before we treat of the seat, or proper residence of Creative Nature, it must be asked whether it can reside in any place, since it is infinite in its essence. To which doubt the whole school of Theologians replies by pointing out that it has no one defined location, like intelligences or spiritual creatures, nor is it hemmed in, like things that have bodies, but it is all pervading; although, according to Gregory, God may be said to be trebly present in all things, either as an actual presence, showing his goodness in them, or in potential, through his influence, or in his essence, for he is their inmost substance. Moreover, God is said to be everywhere, for divine power permeates all beings, and by it he defines the resemblance of the potentiality of the entire universe to himself. He is said to fill all things, not because he is contained in them, but because they are contained in him. For, says Ambrosius, it is the property of GOD to be everywhere and in everything. It is therefore plain that God is not, as you may imagine, present in everything so that anything can take him as a model for its size and shape, as the less takes the greater, but he is present in everything created. We understand, therefore, that God is inside everything, but not shut in, for he is infinite and immeasurable, and outside everything too, but not shut out, for he includes all things created in his own unbounded hugeness. Hence it is said that all things made by God partake of his goodness through his presence in them, or the presence of a degree of his essence, as angels are displayed in souls and souls in animals ; and yet, just as any creature whatsoever is of lower or higher rank according to the beauty of the shape it acquired from its primal substance or Being, so also (as lamblichus states) it will occupy a higher or lower station according to the share of merit it has acquired. Now where we perceive a good that is absolute and elemental, and for so I understand lamblichus’ words one that goes beyond nature, we assume that it is the cause of good, that is, the first principle of the essence of good; Mercurius Trismegistus speaks of this when he warns us not to say anything is better than the One God. Therefore, all operations proceeding from the Creator’s goodness are found to be participants in his essence, nor do they exceed the essential nature of God, because they naturally receive their essence, shape, and their materialised light from the ardent gener­osity of the Creator, by whose gifts they are illumined, endowed with form, turned from possibilities into realities, and are therefore said to be good by participation. And the world and worldly creatures have received this bounty that makes them real from a Creator that was not compelled by necessity, as the philosophical tradition has it, but who wished to perfect his entire creation of his own free and abundant will, according to the royal Psalmist’s Utterance :- “Whatsoever God wished, he did in heaven and earth”. Finally the ancient Philosophers have placed the abode of this creative nature in the heavens because of their beauty and bright­ness. For this reason Plato used to assert that God dwelt in a fiery substance, i.e., in the Ether. Later Philosophers (among whom I name those true worshippers of this Nature, Isidore, Bede and Basilius) seem to agree with him, calling the Empyrean heaven the abode of God. For although God is said to be everywhere, nevertheless, he is said to be present in this (Empyrean) heaven, properly, principally, and for the most part : here the works of his power shine out more, as in a worthier setting and situation, more fitting for the operation of his divine power – as Damascenus says.

God is not said to be above and outside all things because he is a distant spot, but because of the excellence of his nature, as In. Resolut, Theolog. tract 1, p.l, quaest. 4, has it. And this is called the Intellectual Heaven, because God, whose residence it is, is called the Intellectual Spirit. Others have attributed this super-celestial region to angels and the souls of the blessed, and have stated that there is another abode besides this one, which they have called the Heaven of the Trinity, corresponding to the one Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They say that this is God himself in its matter, but that it is very different in its mind. For, according to Albertus, this heaven is the strength of divine power, containing and surrounding all created things. Therefore, to be in this heaven is to be equal in strength to God the creator, container and saviour of everything. All these things are clearly explained by Ezekiel’s vision, where, although these two regions of the Intelligences and the Trinity may appear to differ, if only in the purity and exaltedness of their essence, nevertheless, the Prophet declares that they are contained in one in the Empyrean Heaven, so called because of its perfect brightness, as air and fire are contained in one in the Ethereal Heaven. For he compared the single, convex, surrounding Heaven of the Firmament to the likeness of a man, whose upper part, from the outline of the loins upward, was shining with a very fine and spiritual fire, like that of carab resin; while the lower part, from the loins downward, was spark­ling with a somewhat denser and grosser fire. The partition of this region into two regions of different worth seems to indicate the precelestial heaven, peculiar to spiritual creatures, and the super-celestial one.

–Robert Fludd (Utriusque Cosmi Historia, or The Origin and Structure of the Cosmos)

…………………..

When the intelligence is brought to bear on the tone-world, it finds therein a singular image of the primordial Unity that rules in the universe and orders all things from first to last. Not only that: there opens to it a whole immeasurable canvas, reflecting like countless mirrors the uncreated harmony, reposing eternally in itself, of God the Three-in-One. It sees also the harmony created in time, destroyed by the sin of our first fathers, and restored through the incarnation of the eternal Word—the truly realized harmony of the moral and physical creation, concentrating itself in the most manifold ways to glorify the Trinity. The intelligence is moved thereby to admiration, while in the heart there awakens a foretaste of the Beyond, arousing a tender longing for its true homeland, the land of eternal harmony

–Peter Alkantara Singer


I am alone in the world with a different loneliness form that of
Christ. He was alone because He was everything. I am alone because I
am nothing. I am alone in my insufficiency–dependent, helpless,
contingent, and never quite sure that I am really leaning on Him upon
whom I depend.

Yet to trust in Him means to die, because to trust perfectly in Him you
have to give up all trust in anything else. And I am afraid of that
death. The only thing I can do about it is to make my fear become part
of the death I must die, to live perfectly in Him.

–Thomas Merton

In eternity there is indeed something true and sublime. But all these times and places and occasions are now and here. God himself culminates in the present moment, and will never be more divine in the lapse of all ages.

–Thoreau, “Walden


Often people come to Gnosticism or whatever spiritual path because they feel cheated, empty or angry. They are running from religion in a perceived need to remove themselves from old modes of being that are perhaps “spiritually” insufficient and maybe unsatisfying. As people most of us prefer a “satisfying meal” than just a “snack” to keep us fed for the day. Give us this day our daily bread, as Christ said….

Religion means to tie or to bind. To bring together. Religion typically here in the west is often though of as exoteric and esoteric. Exoteric meaning for the many and esoteric for the few. It is tempting to place a greater value on one depending on your perspective.


However one could argue that there is no inner or outer, no esoteric or exoteric, no occult (Occult means “hidden”) or unhidden. There just is. One could argue the very “act” of supposing or “making’ the esoteric/occult/inner creates a false separation.

The Esoteric (for the few) is often used to mean the “spiritual” or more “in depth” or closer to the divine than the Exoteric (for the many).

As Brother Lawrence states:

The time of action does not differ at all from my time of prayer; I possess God as tranquilly in the bustle of my kitchen –where sometimes several people are asking me different things at one time—as if I was on my knees before the blessed sacrament…It is not necessary to have great things to do. I turn my little omelet in the pan for the love of God; when it is finished, if I have nothing to do, I prostrate myself on the ground and adore my God, who gave me the grace to make it, after which I rise, more content than a King. When I cannot do anything else, it is enough for me to have lifted a straw from the earth for the love of God.

–Brother Lawrence

Largely then once could argue those “fixated” on the “occult/esoteric” will never really “gain the grail” they will just “sup from the grail.”


This “argument” would be like saying something like “I want a secret decoder ring, by using my secret decoder ring I am special, I no longer need the cereal box it came in, I don’t care that I will be starving to death by not eating…cause I have a special decoder ring”

So perhaps the idea that one “only needs inner initiation” is incorrect in that, it is like saying

“I no longer need to eat; ‘cause I can now sup from the grail, but actually obtaining it (becoming the Grail) is not something I will reach, as I only need my decoder ring, not my cereal.”

This is perhaps typified in two Buddhist quotes I like:
….

There are no mundane things outside of Buddhism,

And there is

No Buddhism outside of mundane things.

–Yuan-Wu

I gained nothing at all from supreme enlightenment
It is for that very reason it is called supreme enlightenment.

–Buddha

The problem occurs when people “think” they are involved in the esoteric and/or the occult and thus no longer need the exoteric or the un-hidden

To put it into real world less flowery language terms…

It is like a person who partakes in the Atkins diet. The Atkins diet works by cutting down on carbohydrate intake and increasing protein intake. Yes, I know first hand the Aitkin’s diet does work. Cutting down on “carbs” and eating predominantly meat will indeed promote weight loss. But there is the danger of keeping with that diet. Which would cause imbalance, clogged arteries maybe, and even death….?

Does this mean too much esoteric and too much occult without their “opposites” leads to death? In a very real sense, I would say yes….

I think this is very similar to Christ’s temptation by Satan and Buddha’s temptation under the Bodhi tree

A good way to combat this would be to actively “Be in the world but not of it.” Join a local church or group. By actually serving, we are actually serving.

“Like grapes, we ripen best on the vine.”

…………..

Further:

The Grail a Brief Introduction

But creatures remain untouchable, inviolable. If God wants you to suffer a little, He allows you to learn just how inviolable they are. As soon as you try to possess their goodness for its own sake, all that is sweet in them becomes bitter to you, all that is beautiful, ugly. Everything you love sickens you. And at the same time your need to love something, somebody, increases a hundred times over. And God, Who is the only one who can be loved for His own sake alone, remains invisible and imaginable and untouchable, beyond everything else that exists.”

 

Thomas Merton

 

……..

The Kingdom of Heaven is within you –the immortal words of Christ do not pertain exclusively to the patristic formulae of salvation through sacrament, nor do they point only to the mystical body itself as unitive and unifying salvation. Rather, the observation is most profound or religious truths, akin to the shahadatyn themselves, the depth of micrcosmic reality, the height of human possibility. Above the kataphatic lies the apophatic, and This is unapproachable, impenetrable. But the kataphatic is a Reality humanity mirrors, when cleansed of unnecessary and delimiting contingency.

 

–Ahson Azmat (Extract from: Between Kaf and Nun: Rings, Gardens, Cosmos and Imago Terrae: Towards an explanation of Sacred Tome and Space, found in Sophia vol 12, no1)

http://www.sophiajournal.com/

……

It is for this reason that the highest form of Gnostic spiritual writing, the highest and most challenging and most frustrating in many ways for the reader, is the apophatic/kataphatic contestation, of which the finest and purest example is found in Thunder Perfect Mind.

For I am knowledge and ignorance.
I am shame and boldness.
I am shameless; I am ashamed.
I am strength and I am fear.
I am war and peace.
Give heed to me.
I am the one who is disgraced and the great one.


It is only slightly, I would say, trailed behind by the Gospel of Philip itself. It holds the famous statement of Gnostic apophatic declaration:

Light and Darkness, life and death, right and left, are brothers and sisters of one another. They are inseparable. Because of this neither are the good good, nor evil evil, nor is life life, nor death death. For this reason each one will dissolve into its earliest origin. But those who are exalted above the world are indissoluble, eternal.


Names given to the worldly are very deceptive, for they divert our thoughts from what is correct to what is incorrect. Thus one who hears the word “God” does not perceive what is correct, but perceives what is incorrect. So also with “the Father” and “the Son” and “the Holy Spirit” and “life” and “light” and “resurrection” and “the Church (Ekklesia)” and all the rest – people do not perceive what is correct but they perceive what is incorrect, unless they have come to know what is correct. The names which are heard are in the world […] deceive. If they were in the spiritual realm, they would at no time be used as names in the world. Nor were they set among worldly things. They have an end in the spiritual realm.


What could be a better description of this philosophy than to say it is a prefiguring, written in the mythological and spiritualizing language of the first centuries of the Gnostic era, of the postmodern philosophy of Baudrillard’s simulacrum? I think it is also relevant for us to consider the warning of Max Horkheimer, the
Frankfurt School philosopher of the mid-twentieth century, that we as a society are advancing far faster technologically than we are in terms of our actual substantive enlightenment as human beings. There is a difference between the substance of reason in the sense of “reasonableness”, and the process of “rationalization” — but unfortunately we collapse the two into the concept of the “ratio.” Of course, Gnosticism has never allowed for such a collapse, because of its healthy skepticism about the ability of the ratio per se to provide the salvation of either the human person or of humanity as a whole. It is important for us to hold onto that skepticism. It is a skepticism that is not anti-scientific and anti-rationalistic per se. We are not talking about the kind of anti-scientistic frenzy that has taken hold of conservative Protestantism with its bizarre hatred of genuine scientific endeavor and progress. But we are talking about a recognition that our science and our technology is sometimes advancing well beyond our moral capacity to deal with that advancing process. This is why we face issues like cloning and stem-cell research on which human society seems to be incapable of engaging in real dialogue beyond shouting and screaming matches that actually jettison any kind of reasonable debate in favor of competing fundamentalisms. We can see that is a typical problem in many parts of human life today. We actually have competing fundamentalisms. One fundamentalism of the left, one of the right; one of the Christians, one of the anti-Christians; one of the sexually repressed, one of those who seem to have no sense of the need for any kind of sexual morality based on human diversity and respect for the individual’s sexual identity.

–Brother Matthew Oroborous (From Basilides to Baudrillard… )

 

 

………….

“The four elements stem from a single source element. This is alluded to in the verse, ‘and a river flows from Eden to water the Garden; from there it divides and becomes four major rivers.’ That is, there is a single source which divides into four — the four elements….. This source element is called the yesod hapashut, the ‘simple element,’ in that, at the source, everything is united as one, without differentiation.

 

Everything in the world is composed of four basic elements. Each element contains traces of all the others, even if only in microscopic proportion. Thus, domem (mineral) has ‘earth’ as its main component, but one can find traces of ‘water,’ ‘air’ and ‘fire’ within. The continued existence of the world is based upon the proper combination and interaction of these elements.

 

Each element is radically different in makeup from the others, yet God in His infinite wisdom created them in such a way that they could coexist and sustain life in an almost endless array of combinations — as long as that which they are sustaining is alive. When its ‘life’ ends, the elements disperse — creating a situation, conceptually, of the ‘World of Separation.’ Thus it is the life force that binds the disparate elements together so that man can exist…..

 

Although every person is made up of all four elements, there are four main roots, corresponding to the four letters of the Tetragrammaton (YHVH). Each individual is rooted in his particular letter more than all the others. Correspondingly, he is also rooted in the specific element and character trait that derives from that letter. This is what accounts for the tremendous differences we find in people’s temparents. Some temperaments are rooted in fire, some in air, some in earth, some in water. The main thing is to harmonize their differences, for when difference, rather than harmony, is stressed, strife becomes the norm and people resist and oppose each other. This strife reverberates into their root elements, causing disharmony Above. As a result, the world is visited with destruction and sickness.

The main controlling force which can harmonize these differences is found in the single source element, the Tzaddik, The Tzaddik knows how to establish a proper balance between the various elements in his domain. This brings harmony and peace to each individual and to humanity as a whole.”

— Nosson of Bratslav (Likutei Halachot)

………

Whoever is able to fulfill the first phase of the path, the phase of self-dissolution in the grace of the rose, and is able to break up the magnetic system of ordinary nature to which he is bound is immediately liberated. And although existentially still completely a nature being and so still in the world and within the system of the twelve aeons, such a person will no longer find any hindrance on account of this second sidereal birth. He has become a child of God. He has been freed of all ties forever.

The Gnostic Mysteries of Pistis Sophia (Lectorium Rosicrucianum) 

…..

“O God, If I worship You for fear of Hell,

burn me in Hell without end.

And if I worship You in hope of Paradise,

Forbid it forever to me.


But if I worship You for You,
do not hold back from me Your everlasting Beauty.”

 

–Rabi a al-Basri (8th Cent Sufi Saint http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabi’a )

 

رابعة العدوية القيسية) or simply Rabiʿa al-Basri (717–801 C.E.) was a female muslim Sufi saint.

Rābiʻa al-ʻAdawiyya al-Qaysiyya (Arabic: رابعة العدوية القيسية) or simply Rabiʿa al-Basri (717–801 C.E.) was a female muslim Sufi saint.

…………………….

 

SHAHADATAIN: Bearing witness. In order to become a Muslim one must utter and believe in two Shahadas (Shahadatain): First Shahada: Ashhadu an la illa ill’allah. ( I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah.) Second Shahada: Ashhadu anna Muhammadar rasoolullah. (I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.) The Shahadatain is the gateway to Islam and the gateway to the Garden. It is easy to say, but to act on it is a vast undertaking which has far-reaching consequenccs, in both inward awareness and outward action, in this world and in the next world.

http://www.islambasics.com/view.php?bkID=999999&chapter=19

 

 

 

Cataphatic theology describes God positively according to what He has revealed of Himself in Scripture and nature. It is usually discussed as the opposite of Apophatic (or negative) theology, which attempts to describe God only in terms of what He is not.

Negative theology, also known as Apophatic theology, is a theological approach that describes God by negation, speaking of God only in terms of what He is not (apophasis) rather than presuming to describe what God is.

In negative theology, it is maintained that we can never truly define God in words. In the end, the student must transcend words to understand the nature of the Divine. In this sense, negative theology is not a denial. Rather, it is an assertion that whatever the Divine may be, when we attempt to capture it in human words, we will inevitably fall short.

In contrast, making positive statements about the nature of God, which occurs in most other forms of Christian theology, is sometimes called cataphatic theology.

Negative theology played an important role early in the history of Christianity. Three theologians who emphasized the importance of negative theology to an orthodox understanding of God, were Gregory the Theologian, John Chrysostom, and Basil the Great. It was employed by John of Damascus when he wrote that positive statements about God reveal “not the nature, but the things around the nature.” It continues to be prominent in Eastern Orthodoxy (see Gregory Palamas) where apophatic statements are crucial to much of their theology, and is used to balance cataphatic theology.

Abru-el. An Arab equivalent for the Gabriel of Daniel, and of

the New Testament, both meaning, in Semitic speech, “ Power (or

mighty one) of God.”

Abu. An early Egyptian god of light, and a city sacred to the

ithyphallic Khnum (or Kneph), known to Greeks as Elephantis—not

from elephas “ elephant,” or elaphos “ deer,” but from Elaphas, an

Osirian god of light, or of the sun to which special libations were

offered at Abu. Ab was a name of Osiris, and his hieroglyph was the

phallus (see Kneph). [Eb was also the elephant in Egyptian ; like the

Hebrew, and Tamil, Hab.—ED.]

Arabuda. A celebrated mountain, lofty and detached

from the Araveli range, in the Sirohi state of Rajputāna, where we

lived for four summers. It has played an important part in the

religious history of India, and is still claimed by Hindus, who have

shrines on the heights, and by Buddhists and Jains, whose shrines are

in the valleys : round these still flourish more ancient non-Aryan

cults, at little white shrines (of Adhar-devi, Durga, etc.) seen on the

hill-sides. We have often seen sacrifices of goats, and cocks, to the

ancient Ambā (Sivi) called Bhavānī. The famous Jaina shrines in the

Vale of Delvada (or Dilwara), “ the place of temples,” still contain

cells for Devī-Ambā, who is always curiously associated with Nemināth,

the 21st or 22nd Jain Tirthankara; and nimi, like ambā, is an

euphemism for the mul (pudendum), and also means, “ winking one,

eye, gem, sign, or mark.” Amba’s cell occupies the S.W. corner, or

place of honor in Jaina Vastupālas; and beside it is Adi-nāth’s beautiful

shrine, where stands a colossal black image of Nemi-nātha. For

the old Turanian tribes of India (as seen also from the Euphrates to

the Seine) have always loved a black image, like those of the Madonna,

or of Osiris. It is evident that Jainas have built at Abu on the holy

sites of ancient nature worshipers.

The existing Jaina temples (elaborately sculptured) were erected

by rich merchants. The chief one was built by Vimalsa of Patan

(older Anhil-wāda) of Gujerat, about 1030 A.C. “ He could purchase

armies, and overturn kingdoms.” The second in importance is that of

Vastupāl and Tej-pāl—Jaina ministers of the Rāja Vidaval (1197-

1247 A.C.). These are carefully described by Mr James Fergusson

and others. They approach the Buddhist Vihara style. The second

is dedicated to Adi-nāth (the “ Ancient of Days ”), in his bull incarnation

as the Tirthankara named Rishāba-nātha. In the first are ten

marble elephants (his sawāri) ; and, in the entrance lobby, are statues

of Vimalsa, and of his nephew, on horseback : they are of alabaster,

and stand before a chau-mukh, or “ four-faced,” image of Paris-nāth.

Abu is one of the Tirthas or “ most holy places ” of India.

Jainas here followed the old Adi-nāth, whose shrine is probably far

older than the time of Buddhism. In a lonely cell of the Yoni godess

Bhavāni, he stands in a temple reputed to be much the oldest on the

mountain. East of the Jaina shrines we find the older sites of nature

worshipers—the Achal-Garh (“ abode of fire ”), or Achal-Gādh of

Sivaite and Vishnuva Hindus. The Sivaites say the name, Achal-isvar,

means “ stable, or immoveable god.” For, in the little attached

shrine of the Brimh-Khar (“ hot spring ”), which issues from a deep

fissure over which presides Pārvati (typifying woman), the god’s

“ Toe ” is shown in the water, as an oval whitish button; and, as long

as the “ Foot ” here rests, the mountain will remain, and the faithful

need not fear its rumbling and quaking—often very alarming. By

this thermal spring the bi-sexual creator appears as Ardanār-Isvara

(see Rivers of Life, ii, Plate XIV.), who made male and female. The

whole mountain is called “ the womb of Pārvati ” ; and the fissure is

her Yoni, whence Faith issued as a “ two months’ foetus.” No

European may pass its barred entrance; but we managed to enter the

shrine, and to look closely at the white button in the bubbling hotspring.

On an altar is a silver Pārvati, with two side figures, one

being Siva. They face the great brazen bull of Gawāla (“ the

guardian ”)—the Nandi which ikonoklasts stole or destroyed.

All round this it is holy ground. On the N.E. lies the sweet

wooded undulating vale of Agni-Kund, with a pilgrim tank (350 by

150 ft.) once warm, as the name shows, but now cold and ruined, like

the numerous surrounding shrines scattered up and down the pretty

green valley. Among them is a Jaina shrine of Santi-nāth, the 16th

Tirthankara ; but there are no Buddhist remains. In the centre of

the Kund rises a lingam rock—a shrine now dedicated to Matā the

dreaded godess of small pox. Other rural shrines—mostly Sivaite—

are falling into decay, with broken Nandis and lingams, which are

scattered about the valley ; on one mandap (“ porch ”) Vishnu was

carved as Narāyana, reclining with Lakshmi on Sesha, the Serpent of

Eternity, as when creating the world (see Vishnu).

On the high overhanging cliffs to S.E., is the ruined fort and

palace of the Rānas of Chitor, reached by a steep rocky path, fitly

named after Hanumān, the monkey god. Here are found a small

shrine, and the house of the pujāri, or priest in charge. He shows

three equestrian statues of brass, representing the founders, or

patrons, of his office in the 15th century A.C.—believed to be Kumbha,

the famous Rana of Medwada (1419-1469 A.C.), and two of his Rājas.

North of the valley is the largish village of Urya, north of which

is a path leading to the highest summit of the range, a peak 5660 feet

above sea-level, claimed by Vishnuvas as the shrine of their Gurū,

Abury

Sikār (or Sekra), an old form of Indra, who also rules on Adam’s

peak in Ceylon, where (as here also) is a Pādukā, a Prāpad, or divine

“ foot,” carved on the granite ; which Vishnu here left when

he descended from heaven incarnate as Dālā-Bhrigu, to drive away the

Nāgas, or serpent worshipers (see Nāga). A small temple is built

on the upper plateau. It is probably a natural cave, with a sacred

adytum, and a rest cell for the weary. A bell scares away demons,

and reminds the neighbours that the hungry attendants wait to be

fed. These include wild Bāwas and idiots, Sanyasis and anchorites,

who let their nails grow through their palms : also, till lately, Mard-

Khors, or “ corpse eaters,” the last of whom was walled up alive in a

cave (see Aghors).

Sivaites say that the mountain was cast down by Siva in answer

to the prayers of the great Rishi Vasishta, when his “ cow of plenty ”

(Nandini, “ the earth ”) fell into a deep pool. The mountain spirits

filled the void, and the Great Serpent, or Bud, carried up those who

could not walk. Bud became Budha and Buddha (“ the wise one ”),

whose faith here prevailed from 3rd century B.C. to the 8th or 9th

century A.C. Then came a revolution to Neo-Brāhmanism, when—it

is said—Vishnu recreated Kshatryas. Indra, Brāhma, Rudra, and

Vishnu visited Ara-Buddha (Abu), and purged away its impurities

with Ganges water, and Vedas, driving away the Daityas, “ drinking

the blood of many.” Not till the 14th or 15th century A.C. did

Buddhists however wholly disappear hence. They were probably

then absorbed by the present Jainas.

The Vedas recognise this holy hill, saying that it was thronged

with Ārbuda-Sarhas, worshipping serpents—which are still holy, and

too numerous. Abu was the Zion of the Rājas of Chandra-Vati—

their once resplendent capital on the plains to its S.S.E., now marked

only by broken carved marbles. In 1593 the tolerant Emperor

Akbar gave to the Setām-bari Jains a grant, securing them all their

lands and shrines, and adding that “ all true worshipers of God should

protect all religions. Let no animals be killed near Jaina lands ”—a

mandate that still holds good.

Abury. Avesbury. A celebrated English solar shrine (see

Rivers of Life, ii. pp. 237, 238, 290, 387).

from WIKI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avebury

Avebury is the site of a large henge and several stone circles in the English county of Wiltshire surrounding the village of Avebury. It is one of the finest and largest Neolithic monuments in Europe dating to around 5,000 years ago. It is older than the megalithic stages of Stonehenge, which is located about 32 kilometres (20 mi) to the south, although the two monuments are broadly contemporary overall. It lies approximately midway between the towns of Marlborough and Calne, just off the main A4 road on the northbound A4361 towards Wroughton. The henge is a Scheduled Ancient Monument[1] and a World Heritage Site.[2]

Avebury is a National Trust property.

Avebury

Avebury

Abydos. In Egypt the Greek name of Thinis (see Thinis).

from WIKI:

Abydos (Egyptian Abdju, 3bdw, Arabic: أبيدوس, Greek Αβυδος), one of the most ancient cities of Upper Egypt, is about 11 km (6 miles) west of the Nile at latitude 26° 10′ N. The Egyptian name of both the eighth Nome of Upper Egypt and its capital city was Abdju, technically, 3bdw as in the hieroglyphs shown to the right, the hill of the symbol or reliquary, in which the sacred head of Osiris was preserved. The Greeks named it Abydos, after their city on the Hellespont; the modern Arabic name is el-‘Araba el Madfuna (Arabic: العربة المدفونةal-ʿarabah al-madfunah).

Considered one of the most important archaeological sites of Ancient Egypt (near the town of al-Balyana), the sacred city of Abydos was the site of many ancient temples, including a Umm el-Qa’ab, a royal necropolis where early pharaohs were entombed.[1] These tombs began to be seen as extremely significant burials and in later times it became desirable to be buried in the area, leading to the growth of the town’s importance as a cult site.

Today, Abydos is notable for the memorial temple of Seti I, which contains an inscription from the nineteenth dynasty known to the modern world as the Abydos King List. It is a chronological list showing cartouches of most dynastic pharaohs of Egypt from the first, Narmer or Menes, until Ramesses I, Seti’s father.[2] The Great Temple and most of the ancient town are buried under the modern buildings to the north of the Seti temple.[3] Many of the original structures and the artifacts within them are considered irretrievable and lost, many may have been destroyed by the new construction.

Horus presents Regalia to Pharoah

Horus presents Regalia to Pharoah

Jack Kilmon wrote:

I think this is an important issue often ignored in “historical Jesus
studies.” I agree with Barker and will go further to label the historical
Jesus (sorry, mythers) as an Enochian rather than a Mosaic Jew.

Lets look at Jesus as an Enochian, like the Essenes albeit, I believe, He
differed with the Qumran folks on eschatology. Now this is lengthy but if
the hypothesis is a form of Judaism (Daniel-Enochian) from which both the
Essenes/Qumran/
DSS People arose and to which Jesus also subscribed, I have
to back it up.

We have seen books depicting Jesus the sage, cynic, magicin, healer,
messiah…there is probably a book somewhere claiming he’s a Presbyterian.

He was, IMO, an apocalyptic.

If the Dead Sea Scroll corpus is a good barometer, the late 2nd temple
period saw an
emergence of Daniel-Enochian fervor. In both Daniel and the Enochian
literature, the “son of man” plays a central role.

Jesus himself, NOT ONCE, refers to himself with certainty as the Messiah
but instead refers to himself as the bar nasha/ben adam of Daniel and
Enoch…”coming on the clouds, etc.” It was Paul of Tarsus…hostile to the
Nazarenes, who conferred the name of XRISTOS on Jesus in his reconstruction
of Jesus as the Pauline “Christ Crucified.”

The cradle from which both Jewish and Christian “mysticism” arose was
Enochian apocalypticism, the same cradle from which post-destruction Ma’asei
Merkavah (which would eventually develop into Kabbala) and the Hekhalot
literature arose which deals with “mystical” ascents into heaven.

Anyone pursuing the ancient Jewish sources from which the Nazarenes arose,
should read the considerable Enochian literary corpus now available thanks
to the Qumran texts. The Books of Enoch and their related texts, Jubilees,
Giants, Weeks, Parables, Watchers, Testimonies of the 12 Patriarchs, Dreams,
etc. Enochian apocalypticism is a reflection of a Mesopotamian alternative
to Mosaic” Judaism with its focus on Enmeduranki, the 7th antediluvian king
of
Sippar in the Sumerian Chronicles and a counterpart (or model) for Enoch..

There was a considerable influence by Zoroastrianism on Judaism as a result
to the Babylonian Captivity after which they brought the Enochian traditions
to Jerusalem upon the return. The Jerusalem priests at that time hated the
Enochian Jews (and it is my position that Jesus was an Enochian Jew) who
supported the Maccabees thereby gaining favor with the Hasmoneans. These
Enochian Jews became,
IMO, the Essenes who subsequently developed serious
issues with the Hasmonean priest-kings. I don’t think anyonewould argue
that the Dead Sea Scrolls are not strongly Enochian.

The Jewish Nazarenes (“branchers”) were heirs, IMO, to the Enochian
traditions but Gentile Christianity imported a constellation of influences
from Graeco-Roman sources. That Enochian Judaism was an alternative to
Mosaic nomian Judaeism can explain why Paul appears anti-nomian and why
Enoch was not included in the Rabbinical canon.

Quoted in the Book of Jude:

“And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones To execute
judgement upon all, And to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh
of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, And
of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”
(Enoch 1:9)

Other references to the SON OF MAN in Enoch:

“And there I saw One who had a head of days, And His head was white like
wool, And with Him was another being whose countenance had the appearance of
a man, And his face was full of graciousness, like one of the holy angels. 2
And I asked the angel who went with me and showed me all the hidden things,
concerning that 3 Son of Man, who he was, and whence he was, (and) why he
went with the Ancient of Days? And he answered and said unto me: This
is the Son of Man who hath righteousness, With whom dwelleth righteousness,
And who revealeth all the treasures of that which is hidden, Because the
Lord of Hosts hath chosen him, And whose lot hath the pre-eminence before
the Lord of Hosts in uprightness for ever.” (Part 8 Chapter 46:1-3)

1 And in that place I saw the fountain of righteousness Which was
inexhaustible: And around it were many fountains of wisdom: And all the
thirsty drank of them, And were filled with wisdom, And their dwellings were
with the righteous and holy and elect. 2 And at that hour that Son of Man
was named In the presence of the Lord of Hosts, And his name before the
Ancient of Days. 3 Yea, before the sun and the signs were created, Before
the stars of the heaven were made, His name
was named before the Lord of Hosts. 4 He shall be a staff to the righteous
whereon to stay themselves and not fall, And he shall be the light of the
Gentiles, And the hope of those who are troubled of heart. 5 All who dwell
on earth shall fall down and worship before him, And will praise and bless
and celebrate with song the Lord of Hosts. 6 And for this reason hath he
been chosen and hidden before Him, Before the creation of the world and for
evermore. 7 And the wisdom of the Lord of Hosts hath revealed him to the
holy and righteous; For he hath preserved the lot of the righteous, Because
they have hated and despised this world of unrighteousness, And have hated
all its works and ways in the name of the Lord of Hosts: For in his name
they are saved, And according to his good pleasure hath it been in regard to
their life. (Part 8 Chapter 48:1-7)

The Book of Daniel, like Enoch, was written originally in Aramaic. It
contains the most famous reference to the SON OF MAN.

Daniel 7:13-14 (WEB)
13 חזה הוית בחזוי ליליא וארו עם־ענני שׁמיא כבר אנשׁ אתה הוה ועד־עתיק יומיא
מטה וקדמוהי הקרבוהי׃ 14 ולה יהיב שׁלטן ויקר ומלכו וכל עממיא אמיא ולשׁניא לה
יפלחון שׁלטנה שׁלטן עלם די־לא יעדה ומלכותה פ

13 I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of
the sky one like a son of man (כבר אנש [kibar ‘anash]), and he came even to
the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14 There was
given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations,
and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion,
which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be
destroyed.

Jesus spoke of himself, just as above in Daniel, at Matthew 24:30 And
then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all
the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in
the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

……and at Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said:
nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting
on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

As you can see, Jesus refers to himself as the SON OF MAN (Aramaic bar
nasha) of Daniel and Enoch and not,
IMO, as simply the bar nash/a idiom for
“just a guy.”

Now let’s see how many times Jesus calls himself the bar nasha (son of
man)…he never referred to himself with certainty or non-cryptically as
the Messiah.

Matthew 8:20 And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds
of the air [have] nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay [his]
head.

Matthew 9:6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to
forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy
bed, and go unto thine house.

Matthew 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into
another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities
of
Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Matthew 11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold
a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But
wisdom is justified of her children.

Matthew 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

Matthew 12:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall
be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not
be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come.

Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s
belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart
of the earth.

Matthew 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed
is the Son of man;

Matthew 13:41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall
gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do
iniquity;

Matthew 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked
his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

Matthew 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with
his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

Matthew 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which
shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his
kingdom.

Matthew 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them,
saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from
the dead.

Matthew 17:12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew
him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also
the Son of man suffer of them.

Matthew 17:22 And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son
of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:

Matthew 18:11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye
which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in
the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the
twelve tribes of
Israel.

Matthew 20:18 Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be
betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn
him to death,

Matthew 20:28 Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to
minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

Matthew 24:27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even
unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Matthew 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven:
and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son
of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (this is
right out of Enoch 7)

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noe [were], so shall also the coming of
the Son of man be.

Matthew 24:39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so
shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Matthew 24:44 Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think
not the Son of man cometh.

Matthew 25:13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour
wherein the Son of man cometh.

Matthew 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy
angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:

Matthew 26:2 Ye know that after two days is [the feast of] the passover,
and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.

Matthew 26:24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto
that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man
if he had not been born.

Matthew 26:45 Then cometh he to his disciples, and saith unto them, Sleep
on now, and take [your] rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of
Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.

Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto
you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of
power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Jesus is reported by Matthew alone to have claimed to have been the SON OF
MAN (bar nasha) of Daniel and Enoch THIRTY TIMES….so why don’t we believe
him? Why do we believe Paul of Tarsus instead? It doesn’t require pesher
interpretation, fiction, theologoumenon or midrash…just read the red
print.

An Enochian Jew, in the late second temple period, is one who believed in
the Enochian apocalyptic such as the Essenes and John the Baptist.

Jesus/Yeshua was indeed, IMO, an apocalyptic herald of the “imminent”
malkutha
d’alaha (
Kingdom of God) in the Enochian tradition and, as such, outside of
“normative” Mosaic Judaism. I think there are other indicators that this
“Son of Man” from the ancient of days could be “Lord of the Sabbath” as well
as the Mosaic laws (seen in the formula “It is written” or “You have
heard”…
ABC “but *I* tell you”…XYZ).

So yes, he was apocalyptic but, in his mind, just not a “sage” but THE bar
nasha that was expected by /John (Matthew 11:3), the Enochian apocalyptic
redeemer of Daniel 7:13-14.

Jack

22. Jesus saw some babies nursing. He said to his disciples, “These nursing babies are like those who enter the (Father’s) kingdom.”

They said to him, “Then shall we enter the (Father’s) kingdom as babies?”

Jesus said to them, “When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom].”

23. Jesus said, “I shall choose you, one from a thousand and two from ten thousand, and they will stand as a single one.”

24. His disciples said, “Show us the place where you are, for we must seek it.”

He said to them, “Anyone here with two ears had better listen! There is light within a person of light, and it shines on the whole world. If it does not shine, it is dark.”

25. Jesus said, “Love your friends like your own soul, protect them like the pupil of your eye.”

26. Jesus said, “You see the sliver in your friend’s eye, but you don’t see the timber in your own eye. When you take the timber out of your own eye, then you will see well enough to remove the sliver from your friend’s eye.”

27. “If you do not fast from the world, you will not find the (Father’s) kingdom. If you do not observe the sabbath as a sabbath you will not see the Father.”

28. Jesus said, “I took my stand in the midst of the world, and in flesh I appeared to them. I found them all drunk, and I did not find any of them thirsty. My soul ached for the children of humanity, because they are blind in their hearts and do not see, for they came into the world empty, and they also seek to depart from the world empty.

But meanwhile they are drunk. When they shake off their wine, then they will change their ways.”

29. Jesus said, “If the flesh came into being because of spirit, that is a marvel, but if spirit came into being because of the body, that is a marvel of marvels.

Yet I marvel at how this great wealth has come to dwell in this poverty.”

–Gospel of Thomas

The Gospel of Thomas threatens the status-quo of conservative, literal Christianity – the enemies of Gnosticism – who have done everything they can to make the Gospel of Thomas disappear again, by declaring it Gnostic and therefore heretical.

There is no ‘Gnostic theorising’ in Thomas – it is more likely to have been written at the time the canonical gospels were written and maybe even earlier.

“Thomas, if anything is anti-Gnostic, with its emphasis on the presence of the Kingdom of Heaven within the world now . . . Gnosticism emphatically insisted that the Kingdom of Heaven is to be found in the highest sphere above this world and certainly not here among the archons.”

~Stevan Davies

I came into the unknown
and stayed there unknowing
rising beyond all science.

I did not know the door
but when I found the way,
unknowing where I was,
I learned enormous things,
but what I felt I cannot say,
for I remained unknowing,
rising beyond all science.

It was the perfect realm
of holiness and peace.
In deepest solitude
I found the narrow way:
a secret giving such release
that I was stunned and stammering,
rising beyond all science.

I was so far inside,
so dazed and far away
my senses were released
from feelings of my own.
My mind had found a surer way:
a knowledge of unknowing,
rising beyond all science.

And he who does arrive
collapses as in sleep,
for all he knew before
now seems a lowly thing,
and so his knowledge grows so deep
that he remains unknowing,
rising beyond all science.

The higher he ascends
the darker is the wood;
it is the shadowy cloud
that clarified the night,
and so the one who understood
remains always unknowing,
rising beyond all science.

This knowledge by unknowing
is such a soaring force
that scholars argue long
but never leave the ground.
Their knowledge always fails the source:
to understand unknowing,
rising beyond all science.

This knowledge is supreme
crossing a blazing height;
though formal reason tries
it crumbles in the dark,
but one who would control the night
by knowledge of unknowing
will rise beyond all science.

And if you wish to hear:
the highest science leads
to an ecstatic feeling
of the most holy Being;
and from his mercy comes his deed:
to let us stay unknowing,
rising beyond all science.

……..

The above Poem by John of the Cross threatens the doctrine of conservative, literal Christianity – the enemies of “mysticism” – who have done everything they can to make esoteric insight disappear by declaring it heretical.

There is no mention of the Rosary, No mention of the Holy Spirit, no mention of Cathcetism and no mention of the Trinity, no mention of the Blood of Jesus!

John of the Cross’ poem then is obviously anti-Christian, with its emphasis on inner experience and vision and not reading the Bible. One can only conclude John of the Cross was not a Christian and anything he wrote is not Catholic

~Br Benjamin

“Ideas and words are not the food of the intelligence, but truth. And
not an abstract truth that feeds the mind alone. The Truth that a
spiritual man seeks is the whole Truth, reality, existence and essence
together, something that can be embraced and loved, something that can
sustain the homage and the service of our actions: more than a thing:
persons, or a Person. Him above all Whose essence is to exist. God.

Christ, the Incarnate Word, is the Book of Life in Whom we read God.”

–Thomas Merton

……………….

What is the purpose of Dogma?

I think of it like this:

I can eat soup with a fork, but it is easier to use a spoon.

Just as soup eating is easier with a spoon, if I am painting my home with a brush
and I have no more to paint, I should put down my paint brush until I need to repaint.
There is no need to stir my tea with a paint brush.

I also mean someone else’s dogma….not just a “personal dogma.”

Take the Christian dogma, this dogma will allow a person to eat their soup with a spoon. To change their “mindset.”


In order that they may be awakened toward Gnosis….

“We see things as we are, not as they are.” –Gibran

Thus there is nothing wrong with religion per se, as it allows or as the word actually means, to bind or bring together;
it allows us to be brought together… to be a sheep, yes… so that one can grow toward Gnosis.

If you want to dance, it is far easier to get classes, than it is to simply watch a Madonna video.

Thus, personally, I feel it is problematic to simply disregard religion, as many “seekers” do….
there is nothing wrong with religion, unless you refuse to grow.

–Benjamin

………………

The fourth letter of the divine name represents Shekhinah, divine presence as it dwells in matter, the sparks of holy light scattered throughout the world. This final letter of God’s name has been separated from the three that precede it, wandering through an eternity of exile, just as we have been wanderers in that great and painful chasm that lies between revelation and redemption, between our first glimmer of Y-H-W-H and our ability to transform the world in the light of that vision. Our return home is the return of Holy One and Shekhinah to one another, the reunion of cosmic male and female, cosmic parent and cosmic child. It is also the rejoining of Y-H-W-H within to Y-H-W-H beyond, the reunion of Being-in-all-its-forms with Eyn Sof, the changeless One. Here, we proclaim that ‘beyond’ and ‘within’ are one, that the great unity is one with all and with each of us wandering sparks.

Home is Y-H-W-H, the beginning and the end of our journey. The One who has sent us forth on our way and the One we discover at the end of all our wanderings are truly one and the same. Only as we come home do we understand that every step of the journey had its special place and meaning, that our particular face of the One had to be encountered in just this way and no other.

Home is earth, the mother we abandoned so very many centuries ago. Homecoming is our return to our source within this world, to the great womb out of whom we are ever being born, the one to whom we ever return. Homecoming is the rejoining of matter and spirit, an understanding that this most primal of all separations stands as the cause of our alienation from ourselves, from the deepest roots of our own tradition, and from the earth that nurtures us. Our return is the great act of healing, one directed toward all of these at once: we must heal ourselves, for we are fragmented, we must heal our tradition, for it has been distorted, leading us to less than a full embrace of the One, we must heal the earth, restoring to her that which generations have plundered while there is yet time. The hour is late. Our homecoming takes place not a minute too soon.”

Arthur Green (Seek My Face)

« Previous PageNext Page »