{Sexual Love}[17th August 1988]

[Redbook5:303-305][19880817:1703]{Sexual Love}[17th August 1988]

19880817.1703

I am convinced that the process of, first, recognising the essentially unified spectrum of expressions and types of Love; * and, second, differentiating that spectrum down into its particular components – is essential, not just for self-understanding, but for the harmonious operation of Society as a whole. In particular, the two-fold nature of sexual love is a profound mystery which I suspect can be seen in Circle terms: first its procreative and bonding function between couples; but second, its undoubtedly corruptive [sic] effect in other circumstances.

We may see it as essentially a Circle contrast: all sexual relationships, we may surmise, begin with attraction towards Unity; any sexual relationship which begins through Ordination** and Outward [sic] Action will be an Outer Circle, Way of Separation progress through Complication, Distraction, Fragmentation etc.; any sexual relationship which begins through Love and Revelation will be an Inner Circle, Way of the Spirit progress through Creation, Diversity, Evolution etc. to Harmony and Unity.

Any relationship involving too quick and casual sexual intercourse, for example, or where one of the partners exerts his will over the other, or where one of them is too young, is likely to be Outer Circle; although I have reason to believe that generally (not just in sex) it may be possible to alter one’s relative Circle dominance during the first eighth-circle or so. Homosexual intercourse, as I have said,*** is essentially one-sided in Circle terms and thus (??) sterile, self-gratifying and unbalanced, at least in principle.****

But that, even if correct, is no reason to make it illegal.

*[See [Redbook5:279-282][19880814:1540b]{Sexual Intercourse (& Dream Nakedness)}[14th August 1988]]

**ie Command and Control

***[At [Redbook5:281-282][19880814:1540e]{Sexual Intercourse (& Dream Nakedness) [continued (4)]}[14th August 1988], presumably (but see fn** there). & see eg

[Redbook4:183][19871129:2107k]{The Weight of Sin (1) [continued (8)] – Homosexuality}[29th November 1987], ff;

[Redbook4:188][19871130:0120]{The Weight of Sin (2)}[30th November 1987];

[Redbook5:161-162][19880615:1642f]{Sex}[15^th June 1988];but see

[Redbook4:188-189][19871130:0920]{The Weight of Sin (2) [continued] – Sexual Intercourse and Love}[30th November 1987], &

[Redbook4:190][19871130:0920e]{The Weight of Sin (2) [continued (6)] – Homosexuality: Summary}[30th November 1987], fn]

****Hang on – why should it be more self-gratifying than heterosexual intercourse? – I suppose it depends on the practice involved.

[Judging from previous discussion in this Journal (referenced in previous fn), the writer probably had in mind anal intercourse between males, on the (quite possibly incorrect) assumption that this only gave pleasure to the enterer and not to the entered, so could not be motivated by a desire to gratify another, or at least not directly. <20181119>]

[The writer’s view at the time of editing can probably be summed up as follows: what lifts sexual intercourse of any sort and between any genders above mere self-gratification (which is not in itself wrong except insofar as it exploits others) is the combination of Love and the wish to bring joy to the other person involved. <20181127,20190131> ]

{cf VI. [] 13, &c}

[PostedBlogger31012019]

{Angels and Archangels (2)}[17th August 1988]

[Redbook5:302-303][19880817:(am)b]{Angels and Archangels (2)}[17th August 1988]

19880817.(am)

[continued]

It occurs to me that one logical conclusion which may be partly confirmed by the experiences of the previous days* is that the Archangels particularly (and perhaps also the Degree of Angels generally among their general functions) may indeed be concerned with Vices.** They are not Vices, of course: if they were, they would be called Vices; but as the Vices are the most significant danger to the Soul, so they require the individual presence of an Archangel. By an association which I do not understand (but which also occurs in other contexts in the Outer World) *** the presence of the Agent or Archangel on ‘other business’ may bring back, by association, the Vice – or at least, that is my theory: we are perverse, even if not perverted.

In this theory, the attention of ordinary Angels generally is more collective;**** it may even work (more collectively) on Men in Men’s collective groups, but I am not at all sure about that, as I have certainly dreamt of them as being in collective groups when I was on my own with them.#

The particular Vice is lechery, of course: not sex, but lechery. And it is the Vice at U~, about whom I am writing.#*

By a fortunate co-incidence (this has nothing to do with Lechery), my cousin [Z] rang up yesterday and is coming to stay for a few days from tomorrow – he is the person I know who is most typical of the U~ type.#**

After he has gone#*** I shall have to get down to it and do some client computer work – the client is pressing for it now. ie Distraction?

*[Presumably, from [Redbook5:275-276][19880814:1130]{Two Dreams: Of swimming with fair-haired girls}[14th August 1988]ff]

**[See eg [Redbook4:144-145][19871020:2058b]{Angelic Hierarchies [continued (20)]}[20th October 1987]]

***This is hardly Biblical!

****of the Angels

#The attention of ordinary Angels is perhaps concerned with the less significant things in life, or the less dramatic – I don’t know.

#*[in the draft booklet, presumably – see last previous entry. Not sex because sex, being an action, cannot on its own be a vice, presumably.]

#**That is to say, not anything like wholly typical, of course!

#***He has now#**** postponed his visit – girlfriend has reminded him of other commitments – The best[-]laid plans of Angels and Men Go oft astray?

[!]

#****[[Redbook5:305][19880817:2035]{Complications}[17th August 1988]]

[See [Redbook5:284][19880814:1910b]{Angels and Archangels}[14th August 1988]]

[PostedBlogger29for30012019]

{Integrity}[17th August 1988]

[Redbook5:302][19880817:(am)]{Integrity}[17th August 1988]

19880817.(am)

While writing more of the U~ Outer section of the booklet* – while drawing the Circle diagram with the fundamental Principles or Qualities – I was overwhelmed by an intense feeling of peace, integrity and fulfilment.**

*last night

**Wonderful what a few hours by the Sea can do!

[ref [Redbook5:299-302][19880816:2045]{Angelic Innocence}[16th August 1988]]

[PostedBlogger29012019]

{Angelic Innocence [continued (4)]}[16th August 1988]

[Redbook5:302][19880816:2045d]{Angelic Innocence [continued (4)]}[16th August 1988]

19880816.2045

[continued]

But as for me, I think I now understand why the Ophanim, at least of the Angelic degree Undine, manifest themselves in the way that they do (for I have little doubt that their real form, the Soul Quality surrounding their Spirits, while resembling what I see, is less substantial within the Spiritual Kingdom); and this understanding has set my mind at rest.

[‘Angel’ and ‘angelic’ in this and previous journal entries seems to be used at times to refer to the nine angelic orders as a whole, the Ophanim, at other times to one particular order or degree, that most commonly encountered; here the use is presumably the first, or else the word ‘Angelic’ would perhaps have been replaced by “Archangelic”. See [Redbook5:284][19880814:1910b]{Angels and Archangels}[14th August 1988]. (However, it is worth bearing in mind that each of the four “elemental” manifestations (ie Undine, etc) covers a whole quarter-circle, whereas each degree of the Ophanim covers only an eighth-circle: so to the extent that the “elementals” and the Ophanim remain fixed in relation to each other, the former will cover three (or for the “upper” two, possibly four) of the latter -- two (or for the “upper” two, possibly three) of which will be shared with the adjacent elementals.) As to what the reader makes of all this, it is up to him or her; the writer appears to have seen it as an experiential exploration of, and from, aspects of the Human mind, with an interest in its connections to collective manifestations or symbolism both historically, and potentially (expressing perhaps an underlying reality) within the real order of things. <20190127>]

[PostedBlogger27for28012019]

{Angelic Innocence [continued (3)]}[16th August 1988]

[Redbook5:301][19880816:2045c]{Angelic Innocence [continued (3)]}[16th August 1988]

19880816.2045

[continued]

But one of the most scandalous of many pieces of senseless destruction perpetrated by our Age and Culture, is the destruction of the innocence of love and human [sic] beauty, though the muddying of those crystal waters by perceptions of ubiquitous sexuality. It is partly a lack of proper education,* but much more the relentless merchandising of the sexual mono-culture. It is a great pity: because it has debased love, and beauty, and art, and no doubt in due course it will be found to have driven truth itself into hiding; and, of course, it has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

*{Also a coarseness which imagines itself to be not just common, but universal.}

[continues]

[PostedBlogger27012019]

{Angelic Innocence [continued]}[16th August 1988]

[Redbook5:300-301][19880816:2045b]{Angelic Innocence [continued]}[16th August 1988]

19880816.2045

[continued]

I am an old hand at sex – perhaps I had better rephrase that: I am experienced at biological reproduction, having been more than once involved in both the beginning and the end of the physiological process. Reproduction from beginning to end is an enjoyable,* addictive and thoroughly messy process, and I love it. If we had someone else to look after the babies – if I was able to be polygamous, say, and could afford a large house and lifestyle – I should probably go on fathering children very happily until old age put a stop in [sic] it. And I should, I think, if the present is any guide to the hypothetical, love all my children** to bits, the boys no less than the girls, and each one with a particular love responsive to his or her own particular quality. And my daughters, as they passed through that transient Angelic state in the few years before pubescence, I should doubtless worship and scold, and worry myself sick in their adolescence, and give them away emotionally on their marriages, and then love all my grandchildren as dearly….

Boys, I think, in late pre-pubescence also share some of that Angelic quality; but I believe it to be generally more dynamic, more focussed and willed, and thus perhaps slightly less graceful and free. Even at this age, the different biological and social roles of the sexes cast a shadow before them. Many would disagree with me, of course; and the division of opinion would not be by gender.

*[not, of course, having been obliged personally to give birth]

**& my wives!

[continues]

[PostedBlogger26012019]

{Angelic Innocence}[16th August 1988]

[Redbook5:299-302][19880816:2045]{Angelic Innocence}[16th August 1988]

19880816.2045

A happy few hours spent with [W] and the children on the little beach to the West of the quay at Newquay – Newquay, Ceredigion, Dyfed,* that is – formed for me the thought – no doubt not original – that if one were to create perfection in human [sic] form – immortal and near divine, having therefore no need either to reproduce or to exert strenuous physical effort – one would create it in the form of a pre-pubescent girl, but of adult height. This – I think – logically unassailable statement might well account for the perceived forms of Angels, in most traditions, and in my own experience.** They are visions of beauty and grace – and innocence; and there were one or two Human near-embodiments of that ideal in Newquay today.*** (There were also several of the lumpen variety, poor things; but within a few years they will all look much the same.)

First Barrie,**** poor fool, and then Nabakov,# who is something rather worse, have spoiled us for the appreciation of unsexualised beauty in the Human form – but Artists should know all about it, and many did. I know that I offer hostages to the prurience of the Age in writing of my experiences:#* no doubt it would accuse me of repressed perversions, and point to my “overly religious”#** interests. The more I refused to accept this diagnosis, the more obviously repressed I should be seen to be. But I know it is not true, because not once in this latest chain of experiences has the faintest twinge of sexual feeling occurred.#***  But I am of course, well aware of the World I live in.

*[ie not Newquay, Cornwall; it seems, though, that the one referred to here is generally spelt New Quay]

**Nevertheless, the implication of [[Redbook5:291][19880815:0935h]{Undine (2)}[15th August 1988]ff, & esp [Redbook5:292][19880815:0935j]{Undine (2) [continued (3)]}[15th August 1988]] {291-292} above, and dreams, etc is that Archangels tend towards a slightly more developed Human form. In terms of outlook and function, I suspect, Angels may be more like Children, Archangels more like (young) adults. That is not to say the Angels are infantile, at all; but they are perhaps the more innocent, less concentrated or focussed of the two forms, and this may be reflected in their appearance to me. <880817>

***In particular, drifting along the margin of the Sea….

****[Sir James Matthew Barrie, 1st Baronet, OM; 9 May 1860 – 19 June 1937) was a Scottish novelist and playwright, best remembered today as the creator of Peter Pan. <Wikipedia>]

#[Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov; also known by the pen name Vladimir Sirin; 22 April [O.S. 10 April] 1899 – 2 July 1977) was a Russian novelist, poet, translator and entomologist. His first nine novels were in Russian, but he achieved international prominence after he began writing English prose. Nabokov's Lolita (1955), his most noted novel in English, was ranked fourth in the list of the Modern Library 100 Best Novels…. <Wikipedia>]

#*[ie in these Journals – see previous Journal entries]

#**ref IV.[[Redbook4:235-236][19871219:0105]{Child-ish and Child-like}[19th December 1987], referring to a press cutting in the ms at p]237

#***[Possibly referring to the manifestations starting at [Redbook5:285-287][19880815:0040]{Undine (1)}[15th August 1988] <20190127>]]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger25012019]

{Angels [continued (3)]}[16th August 1988]

[Redbook5:298-299][19880816:0928d]{Angels [continued (3)]}[16th August 1988]

19880816.0928

[continued]

Conclusions following from this* do not necessarily agree with nature-worship. Men should be easiest** (although they can make themselves more difficult by voluntary separation); animals more difficult; rocks more difficult still. But machines may be an attempt by Men to sub-create back towards the Spirit – which moves: in which case, they would be easier than rocks.

And I guess that, as it is for us, so it would be easier for Angels to make things move in ways that are natural for them,*** than otherwise. Birds circle overhead, the leaves of trees rustle, curtains blow inwards,**** doors open and shut; but rocks do not often roll down hill suddenly, except on screes. In any case, as these phenomena occur naturally, meaning should not readily be imputed to them, other than the meaning they naturally bear.

*[See last/last two previous entry/ies]

**{to move}

***[the things, not the Angels….]

****[inserted, probably contemporaneously. See [Redbook3:44-46][19870327:2157d]{Separation}[27^th March 1987]]

[PostedBlogger24012019]

{Angels [continued]}[16th August 1988]

[Redbook5:297-298][19880816:0928c]{Angels [continued]}[16th August 1988]

19880816.0928

[continued]

An ability to ‘move’ in the Outer World is probably unnecessary: they* would simply exist at one point or another, relevant to their purpose. Their ability to act on the Outer World must be a matter for conjecture: perhaps depending on the intensity of [the?] Inner World informing it at that point.

I have the impression from observation that noticeable Angelic effects on Outer World phenomena are rare, but not impossible: to understand how this can occur, one would have to understand the relationship between the phenomenal World – the World known to Science – and the Spirit. I suspect that the Spirit informs everything – but that it is the Degree of Separation from (or out of) the Spirit which gives everything its quality or nature (the Degree, of course, might be in more Dimensions than we are aware of). Rationally, it would seem that the greater the Degree of Separation – and the Dimension? – the higher a Degree of the Ophanim would be needed to move [sic] it.

*[Angels; see last previous entry]

[continues]

[PostedBlogger22for23012019]

{Angels}[16th August 1988]

[Redbook5:296-299][19880816:0928b]{Angels}[16th August 1988]

19880816.0928

[continued]

I think I can explain rationally the existence of Angelic Beings on the assumptions [sic] that there exist both Spirit and Soul. (The existence of Spirit and Soul has been treated elsewhere).*

If the Spirit exists, common language and experience suggest that it can move anywhere – in the phenomenal (Outer) World, within the Inner World, and even perhaps, in an appropriate way, in the World of Information.

If the Soul exists, it is clearly an existence of the Inner World – that is, the World accessible directly to our Minds, not through the senses or even the bodily channels of communication.** This follows from the explanation of the Soul as affecting our personalities, being affected by our experiences, etc.: all its communications are within the Mind (which it may or may not be considered a part of, according to one’s definition of Mind).

It follows that Angels, being composed of Spirit ‘surrounded’ by Soul, which*** is their Quality – the Spirit being their driving force, as it were, and (because Angels have no ‘Self’ in the sense ‘selfish’, ‘self-centred[’]) subject to no conflict with the Will of God**** – will be entirely free to move in the Inner World, where both Spirit and Soul move freely.

*[eg [Redbook2:217][19811228:1330]{Realisation}[28th December 1981]; & cf

[Redbook3:42-43][19870327:2157](THE SELF, THE SOUL, AND THE SPIRIT)[27^th March 1987]]; & eg

[Redbook3:45-46][19870327:2157f]{Separation [continued (3)]}[27^th March 1987], &c]

**NB!

***[the Soul]

****For this purpose, you could define the ‘Father’ as the Will and the Spirit as God.

[continues]

[PostedBlogger22012019]