Full Circle?

[jenjulian]

I am in the midst of some kind of spiritual hurdle, I hope to put is as simply as possible, because it just feels like it needs to be out of me. I'm starting to suspect that as a seekers, we do not move forward, like on a highway to a destination, but instead we are traveling a circle. I seem to continually come back to where I've begun, but is it with new eyes?, it seems to be. We start out rejecting being satisfied with living life without questioning, so we travel and question, only to return to the spot of realizing we should just live and silence all of that mind stuff. We pray and seek only to find that we need to stop seeking.
This is the one that is shaking me up, though. If we are true seekers, then we must not be searching for God, but for truth, and we must not be afraid that truth may exclude a god. I did not realize until this weekend that I must be open to whatever I find, not only what I find that fits into my idea of what I want to find.

So, we start out some time in our life without a belief in God. We travel through all of the spiritual seeking and then do we come back to square one? As I was closing my eyes and letting my mind rest and just Being, I was empty, it was an empty that was endless and there was no separation. I was this. So, instantly my mind has to process and 'figure' it all out. It says oh, my goodness, I am nothing, the bottom line, when you reach that point of communion, it is not with God, it is with nothing. So, of course, I panic and then I cry.

But my only answer to this time, is that coming full circle (no matter how little my beginning circles are) is that we return with a deeper understanding, which means I do not jump back to my starting point and say there is no God, or some silliness like I'm an atheist. I discovered the empty, this puts my back to the beginning in the sense that God is not something that our minds can find. I go back to where I cannot describe him, I cannot put him in a jar and I cannot explain. There is peace in this empty and I do not have to call it anything. I can just Be.


Thank you for somewhere to write about this.
jen

[jenjulian]

Another thought on all of this.

Is it like this?

We have to let go of all of the religious trappings.
Then we have to let go of all of the 'spiritual' trappings.
Then we have to let go of God? As Meister Eckhart states?

[W4TVQ]

"Then we have to let go of God?"

That is probably a good idea; if we have a grasp on "God," what we have grasped is not really God. (We can get into semantic games at this point.)

The first step in the process is, however, to let go of whatever God we have created in our own image. The Tribal God. The God we got stuffed into us at the age of 2, or 3, or 6. The "god data" that we dowloaded and installed in youth. That's how I see it, at least: we download our beliefs from some authority center, be it the Vatican, or Hagee's church, or Mrs. Eddy's book, or somebody else's book or church, or Mom and Dad, and then we install it and there we are, all set with a religion that will keep us repaired for a lifetime. Except that (continuing the computer analogy) files get corrupted and viruses are inserted and the program stops functioning as we hoped it would. And we limp along trying to make do with the god we dowloaded way back then, and we find he is the Tribal God and cannot really provide answers to longings and hopes and questions. SO: we have to let go of God. Doing so creates a vacuum, and it is into that vacuum that the real God Himself can flow like the soft breeze of spring. He is nothing like the Tribal God, and sometimes we simply do not recognize Him at first. We think He is not there, because the experience of Him is so unfamiliar. But He is there, and we are cradled safely in His hand. And He gently reminds us that He is capable of being in charge, and that the more we focus on ourselves, the less we see of Him. We must be like Mary, responding to His call with "behold the handmaid of the Lord: be it done to me according to your will."

BUT: we cannot scold ourselves or feel "failure angst" if we are not able to make this great transition in an instant, or in an hour, or in a year even. Awakening is a process. Wherever we are in that process now is where we are supposed to be; we need only allow it to continue, and not block it with too much of "me" and "mine."

Namaste
Art

[jenjulian]

Art, I really like what you have written. I've focused so much up to now on letting go of the ego, the I, it is strange to me that I'm having this time of feeling like I need to let go of God. Maybe it is as you are saying, I'm letting go of the old ideas of God. ( I like the computer analogy a lot) I don't know. I was present with a lady and her sisters this afternoon when she passed on from her earthly body. She took her last few breaths, it was a very peaceful time, all of us there together. Then just when we all knew she would not take another breath, a music box from the front room of her apt started playing. I believe more than I've ever believed anything, that the music was Spirit. The Hospise team took forever to get there and so I sat with her body for thirty minutes alone. I thought a lot about what Stephen wrote, concerning how we should honor the body that we use while we are here.

Thank you for responding to my questions.
jen

[W4TVQ]

"I was present with a lady and her sisters this afternoon when she passed on from her earthly body."

This may be off topic, but I feel impelled to resond. That is an experience to be treasured. Reading of your experience reminded me of my own. I was with my mother when she left this plane. She had been "gone" for some time, but it seemed to me as if there were someone still running around in that tired old body closing doors and turning off lights. When she breathed her last breath, it was not a "death" but simply a transition. I've never had any fear of "death" since then, though i earnestly pray to whomever may be listening that it not be an agonizing experience of lingering pain. That is something I do not understand at all, why the wonderful transition from here to reality should have to involve suffering.

We have both been privileged to see how it ought to be. That's something to be grateful for.

Namaste
Art

[jenjulian]

This is a wonderful addition to this conversation, called the Three metamorphasis of the Soul. I went googling after this was mentioned on the inteview documentary of Joseph Campbell. This essay applies it well to the seeker of truth and to the struggle of letting go of the Tribal God.

http://members.core.com/~ascensus/docs/Metamor.html

[jenjulian]

I was reading through this essay again, and want to clarify that I do not believe that it is saying we are living without God.

I understand it to mean that we are throwing out the God of concepts, which most of you have talked about. The God that is too narrow, because it is encased in our thoughts, and replaced with the child.
The Child= first motion.
I think of Aristotle and he descibes God as the first mover.
I see then, the Child as our authentic selves, or the recognition of ourselves as God, as creators.
I also need to say that I had all of these thoughts about brushing along the edge of agnosticism and the death of God PRIOR to watching Joseph Campbell, which led me to writings that describe this exactly as I've been experiencing it. This is thrilling and chilling at the same time! It is as though I asked a question and the cosmos answered me, right out~

[W4TVQ]

Rather than "throwing out the God of concepts," I wonder if we are not simply becoming aware that there is no "God of concepts" at all. I see a rather remarkable development in human spirituality in western thought taking place today as The One reveals Him/Her/Itself as All That Is rather than as the Tribal God. Until now, when we have the benefit of contemporary Quantum Physics and of Einstein's theories, the One could only reveal Himself to western minds as the Tribal God because the human mind could not go past that. In the east, that transition took place long, long ago, as witnessd by the vedic teachings, especially in the Mundaka Upanishad.

I suppose a thouand volumes could be written about why philosophy and/or theology took totally different directions in the west and in the east, and still not grasp the reasons. Nor does it really matter; what matters is that a common understanding is spreading across the world, despite the frantic resistance to it in many quarters. The accumulated teachings of Mrs. Eddy, Emily Cady, Ruby Nelson, Butterworth, Ernest Holmes, ACIM, Zoofence and others seem to be part and parcel of this spiritual unification of the world. That's why I finally gave up and left the "ChristianBoard.com" forums, because loyalty to the Tribal God was and is still invincible in some quarters, and it can be both divisive and destructive.

I find the most beautiful and concise presentation of the "real" God in the Mundaka Upanishad:
"But the spirit of light above form, never-born, within all, outside all, is in radiance above life and mind, and beyond this creation's Creator... Know him as all that is, and all that is not, the end of love-longing beyond understanding, the highest in all beings...In the supreme golden chamber is Brahman indivisible and pure. He is the radiant light of all lights, and this knows he who knows Brahman."

What else is this but the same teaching we encounter in ACIM, and that we find in Stefan's "The Simple Way"?

I've been "warned" that if I follow this teaching I will "go to hell" and burn forever. Hm. If the peace, and freedom, that this knowledge brings is hell, reserve me a room there, please. It seems obvious, to me at least, that the Tribal God is a god created by man, in the image of man. The real God, infinite, eternal and unchangeable, the God described by Paul Tillich as The Ultimate Ground of All Being, the One described in the Upanishads, cannot be defined by us: rather, He defines us. It is perhaps not a bad thing, ultimately, to have a mythology full of images and stories which allow us to speak about God, so long as we know that nothing we say really says anything about God; it says a lot, instead, about us. He is beyond description, knowable only as He chooses to reveal Himself to the individual seeker.

Namaste
Art

[jenjulian]

"But the spirit of light above form, never-born, within all, outside all, is in radiance above life and mind, and beyond this creation's Creator... Know him as all that is, and all that is not, the end of love-longing beyond understanding, the highest in all beings...In the supreme golden chamber is Brahman indivisible and pure. He is the radiant light of all lights, and this knows he who knows Brahman."

That is truly beautiful. If I could pick the one thing I am most grateful for in my life, of the most important thing of all, it is that certainty inside, when truth is sung, it needs no qualifications...so I don't have to listen to those who tell me what is and isn't good. Sign me up too...

A great resource online is http://www.sacred-texts.com. Will keep me busy for the rest of my life. Campbell talked about following our bliss. When I discovered this treasure of religious/spiritual/philosophical reading (for free!) I was so giddy, I had butterflies in my stomach. I know what my love is, just don't know how to make my life fit around it. For now, it is my spare time work. I'm reading on gnosticism and the beginning of Christianity. Very important point is made, in that Christianity was born out of the time of gnostic thinking and for a better understanding, we need to place it back within the context of where and when it was born. When everything that was gnostic was called evil and destroyed, it put Christianity out there floating with no roots, never quite fitting, something just not quite right.

[W4TVQ]

I find gnosticism interesting as well. IMO gnosticism was/is a valid spiritual discipline, an understanding of God and His creation that is quiet compatible with the teachings of Jesus Himself. However, the early fathers, starting with Paul, saw it as a threat to their control of the developing church and felt it "had to go."

However, "it's back" ... in the form of ACIM, for one thing. Also, the teachings of the eastern mystics is to some degree gnostic. The idea of "sola fide,sola scriptura" that has dominated Protestant Christianity for so long is losing its grip, and more and more Chrstians are looking beyond that little box to seek the fulness of Truth. I think that is why ACIM appeared when it did.

What I hope is that the new awareness of Truth, what we call "new thought", does not end up as codified and encapsulated as did credal Christianty.

Namaste
Art

[zoofence]

… Christianity was born out of the time of gnostic thinking and for a better understanding, we need to place it back within the context of where and when it was born. When everything that was gnostic was called evil and destroyed, it put Christianity out there floating with no roots, never quite fitting, something just not quite right.

Very nicely put. I particularly like “floating with no roots”. Nice image.

What I hope is that the new awareness of Truth, what we call "new thought", does not end up as codified and encapsulated as did creedal Christianity.

In my experience, your hope will be (1) realized and (2) dashed.

Within yourself, the new awareness of Truth will not end up codified and encapsulated, precisely because you are facing head-on the fear of uncertainty and vulnerability that resides within each of us. That is, you have observed that the separative sense of self (“I am me and you aren’t me”) is an illusion, even if a Divine Illusion, and you have acknowledged the desirability, hopefully even the inevitability, of transcending it, recognizing that doing so unavoidably means the erasure of “me”.

In a word, you are no longer afraid of Truth and Its Implications. Therefore, you do not need to hobble it and corral it.

Nonetheless, the so-called New Thought movement itself will experience codification and encapsulation, and in some respects, it already has. It is bound to happen. Gravity affects everyone and everything that perceives herself/himself/itself as being of the world. “You will always have the poor.” That is neither a good thing nor a bad thing; it simply is what is.

“… and in some respects, it already has …” Consider, for example, the legal battles that were fought (are still being fought?) over copyright and trademark rights pertaining to A Course in Miracles. As should be clear here, I love those books, but the politics surrounding them are, at least to me, reminiscent of the power struggles which Anna and I have observed in other “New Age” groups, not to mention the arm wrestling which many historians report as having taken place between Peter and Paul, and of course which evolved, as you suggest, among the Christian sects following the crucifixion, sometimes brutally.

And why not? The Gnostic gospels had to be suppressed for the same reason Jesus had to be crucified. The Teachings are about transcending codification and institutionalization, not only of scripture but of ourselves and of all the constraints which codification and institutionalization impose upon ourselves. Those whose comfort, not to mention whose authority, is threatened by that message could not allow the Teaching to survive in Its Pristine Legitimacy. The explanation of course is always, “We are doing this for the good of the people”; the question a seeker must ask is, which people? Also, as I have written here and elsewhere on TZF, the canonical gospels report sufficient instances to make it glaringly apparent to me that the disciples did not understand the Message, and so their complicity in the suppression of the Gnostic understanding of the Message (to whatever extent they were complicit) does not surprise me one bit. Similarly, consider that orthodox Christianity turned Mary Magdalene into a prostitute, even though there is not a word in the gospels to suggest that. Why would they do that? To me, the answer is clear enough: The culture of orthodox Christianity was (is?) patriarchal, and so having women in positions of authority was (is?) anathema; therefore, this woman had to be belittled, even though the canonical gospels make it pretty clear that she was a significant disciple. Who was it who said, we cut off the heads of others to make ourselves seem taller?

But I urge you not to despair. In this respect, every spiritual journey is the same: We start where we are right now, and we behave, and we react, accordingly. No matter what we read or what we hear or whom we follow, there is no other way we can behave or react. And from there, we grow. Sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly. But always inexorably. It is a Divine Process, and it unfolds divinely. Which is why I am convinced that it is impossible to do it incorrectly.

Thank God.