Truth

James Davis

Yes, limited vision is ours, and yet this limit appears against the backdrop of an unlimited future with unlimited powers in and through all life. So many dimensions of unfolding truth...

There is cosmic Truth; kin to the energy that patterns all the suns in Space. It is transcendent Spirit, pure Light beyond thought and word.

There is Monadic truth, the sun-like core of Self, mystically one with spatial suns.

There is intuitional truth, pure Beautiful light, and more of truth than fits most any brain.

There is truth of soul, a fire above the mind, and great, but well below the fires of the great hierarchy of suns.

There is the relative truth that developed mind takes and forms to words. It embraces the practical and the communicative. It is thought-truth in which we may see, from time to time, mirrored sparkles of things cosmic and mysterious.

There are truths on the many strata of the emotional plane, an array of sensing and sensitivities in graded steps from most beautiful downward toward the darkly glamorous and exclusive pseudo truths of the fanatics.

But what is our relation to truth? We are light obstructions becoming clear light transmitters. All the common of intellect, of emotion and body, and all ordinary noise that we do and say-all this competes with the pure pressures from above, with the transcendental. So, in our sleepy misalignment we block our creative gifts, and our fears, greater than our loving desire to give, hold us prisoners.

Yet then there comes the upward turned eye, the pure feeling, the creatively tensed thought--these instruments of divinity manifest. And as the eye mirrors suns in the far depths of space, so a certain turn of mind and heart mirrors the mystic, the most Transcendent. Then we render ourselves most clearly, drawing ever closer to the energy that patterns suns, ever closer to transcendent Spirit, to pure Light beyond thought and word.

The Paradox of "anti"

James Davis

There is an implied qualification and paradox in this that's worth elaborating. And by doing so, I hope to demonstrate the limitations in my formulation above, and extend thinking in one more direction.

On the one Gemini hand, spirit is in conflict with forms, and in a sense "anti" to them. In the other Gemini sense, it is not. And here we have the perennial paradox that underlies all verbal formulations, and especially, for us, those of a metaphysical nature.

About this word "anti:"

"anti-
1. against, hostile to, opposed to antilabor, antislavery
2. that counteracts, that operates against ...
3. that prevents, cures, or neutralizes antitoxin
4. opposite, reverse antiperistalsis
5. rivaling antipope
6. having the superficial aspect, but not the usual characteristics, of antihero

Etymology: Gr anti-, ant- < anti, against < IE *anti, facing, opposite, near (> L ante, opposite, before)..."

We might like to think ourselves above dualities and not "pro" this or "con" that. Yet is there anyone here who is not antislavery? And are we all not all, in some measure, slaves to our bodies, to our emotions, our forms and our identifications?

The Anti in the Warrior of Light

The struggle between spirituality and materialism, between light and darkness, is a given in the Ageless Wisdom. In DK's Scorpio terms, "Warrior am I, and from the battle I emerge triumphant." So the words "against," etc. have some real validity here. That spirit is "opposite" to matter is another given, yet in another sense spirit is one with it, as HPB once wrote.

ABCs of Good and Bad: Let's reflect on some of our ABCs:

The struggle is ever against separation and for unity where conflicts between spirit and the world are resolved in the evolutionary process. When matter is shaped into forms, it is by the action of spirit. Forms hide the spirit, yet also come to reveal spirit, greater revelation or initiation making forms more the vehicle of soul or spirit, and this the outcome of evolution. To the degree that any form embodies spirit and is truly shaped by spiritual energy and consciousness, to that degree we say the form is "good," it is closer to "god" than previous incarnations.

DK criticizes forms. But DK also praises forms. He praises some aspects of the nations and groups, Jews included. He praises cities and individuals, and virtues of all types (even though basically "formal"). So there is no absolute rejection of all forms, but there is a timely nurturing of forms as they appear, and in so far as those forms are steps in the evolutionary process.

So, while any form is relative good and useful as a spiritual and evolutionary vehicle, spirit or soul is in partnership with it. This would be true, we may surmise, whether that form is an atom, a man, a city, a nation, a planet, solar system, or some greater cosmic entity.
There is righteous identification with forms. We are given to understand, that it is the soul's identification with form that keeps us, as a persona, in incarnation. Since incarnations are part of the divine plan, then in that sense, timely forms are "good."

All is Good, All is God

(In another sense we can say that it is all forms "good," or that there is not "good" and "bad," but that takes us into the non-dualistic, into complete unity. This unitary reality ever remains the final solution to all human problems, yet paradoxically, we find that we must work out our problems on a more practical level, yet always against the backdrop of that consciousness of unity.

But we can not give as a reason, to the Jews and Palestinians, that they should trade page one of their newspapers [as Rick suggested] because all men are brothers and all is one. We might better frame the suggestion, with a concession to the persona, as a step toward peace and an end to pain and suffering. So we work in the relative vocabulary of war and peace and all in between.)

About Prisons

There is also, as we know, an imprisoning identification with forms. Eventually, every form becomes less of adequate vehicle for the soul's experience and more of an obstruction and a prison. This is the "Moon" principle in DK's esoteric astrology. When the form (physical and psychic) of any incarnate entity becomes outdated, it becomes esoterically "evil" and the Will of divinity eventually sweeps it away, often with much ray-4-Moon struggle and pain.

And again, the thing that makes the form hard to live with, and hard to die with, is our intense attachment to and identification with it. This is true, whether it is our body, our emotions, our family, or our nation.

The Basis of the Criticism

I review this ABC of the Wisdom for all and for myself, as I think that this is the underlying basis for understanding of DK's criticisms of any entity--or rather the form of it--whether it is Jews, "The I AM movement," humanity's obsession with the sacral center, Christian churches, the political corruption in the United States, or the psychological glamours that he elaborates at length in "Glamour a World Problem."

So there seems to be an esoteric sense in which DK, or any Master, is anti-form and by extension anti-Jewish, anti nationalism, etc.

Is DK anti-nationalism?

(Now I think its also obvious that DK, or any Master, is not anti- nationalism in any absolute sense. Masters respect forms up to a point. DK's "Destiny of the Nations" is full of praise and encouragement of nations. But, in so far as any nation is "for" itself alone, and so "against" other nations, then to that extent the nation falls into the what DK would call the "heresy of separation," and in that sense nationalism is condemned. Yet, I think the Wisdom clearly indicates that every nation and every form must die when the time comes. No form is worthy of immortality.)

Is DK Anti-Semitic?

The human sense of "anti-semitism," suggests an emotional reaction or aversion. It suggest fear that Rick pointed to today. It suggests that the person with that bias has an ignorance based knee-jerk reaction against the Jews. It suggests a separative spirit, that very separative spirit that DK repeatedly advises us to avoid. All of this is at the level of unredeemed personality, and all of it is, by definition, impossible to a Master of the Wisdom. So, in the mundane sense, DK is not "anti-semitism" or "anti-Jewish" or anything of the kind.

Back


Love and Injustice

James Davis

Uncovering the truth and taking a stand against evil, where ever it is found--be it in Israeli or Palestinian policies, or in US policies--that is part of the expression of Love. This is also a way of saying that love, to be real, must be fused with wisdom and backed by Will.

I have sought, by thought and research, to "falsify" DK's statements about Zionism. I failed, and so the scientists in me is forced to accept that the major burden of the responsibility for the Israeli/Palestinian horror falls squarely on the shoulders of Israel and on the US support for it.

Does this diminish my love and compassion for the tragic situation in which the average Israeli citizen finds himself? No, rather it magnifies it. Yet, I feel deeply that Israel's stance and approach to Palestine is terribly and fundamentally wrong, and that it is a grievous violation of the spirit of brotherhood that is foundation of all religion, ethics, and right action.

Even if someone we love kills another human being out of ignorance, that fact does not undermine our love, because love--in so far as it is true and spiritual-- is unconditional. But approval is not unconditional, and should not be. It is no different at a national or collective level. And it is not that we disprove of any individual or nation utterly or entirely, for we see how culture and light emanates from the better angels of all, and we know that in Israel and in all humanity is divinity and in them the assurance of the ultimate triumph of good.

Back



On Identification

James Davis

In the abstract, people tend to picture their thinking as reasoning based on judicious examination of evidence. Our conclusions, we imagine, are the result of mature reflection based on wide experience and a thoughtful deliberative process. But in practice, our thinking is shaped to great extent by our personal identifications and associated emotions. Often these identifications are unconscious, and we don't see the extent to which our thinking and conclusions are bound and limited.

Identification is all about our relation to forms: physical, emotional, and mental. It is also about groups, for we tend to adopt the forms belonging to the groups we are born into or drawn to by affinity. We identify with a form of philosophy, a world view, a political group, a form of religion, a family, nation, or whatever.

We identify with our body, our desires, our intellectual faculties, our materialism, our fears, our goals, and so on. Our attempts at clear thought and conclusion are severely hampered by a host of things from the past and present. In identification, the emphasis is on the "I" or our ego-involvement with forms.

To some degree, identifications are normal and a necessary part of life. But to be healthy, identifications must be held lightly, skillfully, and consciously, and with a certain detachment. When held in the right spirit, we can meditatively withdraw from any identification, and see it from above. When we can do this, then we are not bound by it. We incarnate in it at will, and withdraw at will.

But in practice, we fall asleep inside our identifications. They become our self, or the illusion of our self. These identifications then control us, resulting in automatic behaviors and associated group-think. We are then so attached to our identifications that they condition our every mental and emotional pattern, and we remain trapped in the pattern without knowing the cause or nature of our bondage.

Back


Life Cycle of Symbols

James Davis

Humanity has had two thousand years to abuse the name Christ and Jesus, and the job could have been fully ill-done in far less time.

We think and invest in symbols. The investment serves for a time. But a symbol set can only embody so much light and fire. Then, as we notice its inadequacies, the symbol begins to die for us. Having served us for a time, the language runs its course and we find ourselves ready to move on. Discarding thoughts and their corresponding symbols, we pass to new thought and subtler use of the mind. Some hold their symbol set closely, as if to squeeze every bit of life from it. For others, a set of symbols or words quickly becomes oppressive and must be changed more frequently.

When to keep and when to discard and move on, is individual. Otherwise considered, there are at least two ways to deal with vague, ambiguous, or troublesome words. One is to drop them in favor of more precise and fitting language. The other is to redeem them, resurrect them, dust them off, polish them until they shine and are again serviceable. While most any word can be redeemed, the question often is, in a given case, is it worth the effort?

Redemption is sometimes more work and less effective than the adoption of a new verbal body for our thoughts.

In choosing resurrection, I take it that DK had a specific audience and objective in mind. In essence his writings are universal, but in language they are limited and will have an anaesthetic effect on some ears. To the degree we keep the given language as give, we accept and work within the limitation.

My ray tends to break with forms more quickly, but I understand the temporal value of what is given us.

Back