Tuesday, 25 February 2020

{Evidence in Religion}[30th August 1989]


[Redbook6:219][19890830:1248]{Evidence in Religion}[30th August 1989]

19890830.1248

In matters of religion and even metaphysics, unlike in science, no single piece of evidence can be expected to provide proof. What is required is a continuing development and assessment of a plurality of evidences.


[PostedBlogger2502 for02032020]

{Fasting and Sleep}[26th August 1989]



[Redbook6:218-219][19890826:1100]{Fasting and Sleep}[26th August 1989]

19890826.1100c

Reading about Bede Griffith’s* experiences through fasting etc – I was suddenly reminded that, in addition to occasions writing at [C] when I have cut down drastically on food, there was another time, when I noted that if I ate less food I required less sleep: and that was in my first year at Cambridge, probably the Lent term, when I was writing [0]’s earlier version ‘The Gift’ and was generally in some psychic turmoil:** in a state of crisis.


*Bede Griffiths, ‘The Golden String’, Collins, 1954, 1979 (per [Canon][XQ])***

**[When (if memory of much more recent sight of the letter is correct) the College authorities wrote to the writer’s parents asking whether there was any history of mental illness in the family....
[Redbook4:244-245][19871220:0000b]{Schizophrenia (3) [continued]}[20th December 1987],fn, confirms this]

***[See [Redbook6:125-126)][19890504:1300b]{An Invitation to the Church}[4th May 1989], esp fn***; & last previous entry]



[PostedBlogger2502for01032020]

{Healing}[23rd August 1989]


[Redbook6:218][19890823:1725]{Healing}[23rd August 1989]

19890823.1725

[I have just] r[ead] Nicky Cruz, ‘Where were you when I was hurting?’ (per [Canon][XQ])* – a book which, if it is factually correct (and I believe its author to be sincere)** suggests that my limits on Jesus’ cures*** are too narrowly set: this man hears tendons and bones snapping and popping**** as a crippled girl is straightened out, but claims no credit for himself. But then, is this not analogous (over a shorter time-scale) to what has happened in the apparent straightening of my own bones during the last few years or so?#


*[See [Redbook6:125-126)][19890504:1300b]{An Invitation to the Church}[4th May 1989], esp fn***]

**[The bracketed words are almost certainly a statement of fact, not a part of the condition]

***ref [[Redbook6:128-129)][19890518:1657]{Gospel Miracles}[18th May 1989]&f(esp)] above

****[!]

#[W] thinks not!
[ref [Redbook6:163-165][19890722:1004]{Physical, Moral or Spiritual Growth}[22nd July 1989]]



[PostedBlogger25for29022020]

{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (7)]}[20th August 1989]


[Redbook6:218][19890820:2007g]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (7)]}[20th August 1989]


.2328
[continued]
- - - -
This conclusion,* albeit rather speculative, resolves a question as to whether Man was of a distinct status in being granted the Spirit inwardly by special act of God (which I initially preferred, but later became concerned about) or whether, as is now suggested, the spirit of God is accessible to Man as a part of the design and natural development of Creation.


*[See last 6 previous entries [Redbook6:215-218][19890820:2007b]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels}[20th August 1989]ff;
& especially [Redbook6:216][19890820:2007d]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (4)]}[20th August 1989] (presumably)]



[PostedBlogger25for28022020]

{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (6)]}[20th August 1989]


[Redbook6:217-218][19890820:2007f]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (6)]}[20th August 1989]

.2328
[continued]

Christianity’s message, as I understand it, is that by focussing on (or through) the figure of Jesus Christ (the C at the top of the Circle)* one can clear one’s Soul of the stains which would prevent integration toward[s] eventual Union with God.

The interesting corollary of that is that there are inward** circles which do not lead immediately to the Holy – but may only be (as it were) remote or early inward** circles, or spirals, leading towards that eventual end – evolution being the most obvious among these.*** Evolution is at u~ on the Inner Circle; perhaps its position below the ‘equator’ (g~ – m~) is connected with the ‘remote’ status?
- - - -

*[in this context]

**[inward does not equal inner]

***{& see eg R&D in earlier Vol[ume] (IV?)[[Redbook4:39-43][19870712:1000g]{Research and Development}[12th July 1987]ff, presumably, though unclear exactly where]}


[continues]

[PostedBlogger25for27022020]

{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (5)]}[20th August 1989]


[Redbook6:217][19890820:2007e]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (5)]}[20th August 1989]

.2328
[continued]

How a Man perceives the Spirit* is still, of course, a question of the Soul-colour through which the Clear Light of the Spirit is perceived by him (and others).

(This, incidentally, suggests an answer to the old chestnut: Do animals (particularly eg dogs)** have Souls?*** The cautious answer is, in a strictly natural sense of a psyche, or register of experiences and characteristics, potentially yes; but not in a Church sense, as animals’ ‘souls’ are not transparent or translucent to the Light of the Spirit which will not therefore take any part of them back**** to Union with God; they simply end, presumably without having strong or sophisticated enough personalities to manifest or continue in the ‘Underworld’ leading to destruction. But this is, of course, speculative!)


*[See last previous entry]

**[& horses! – &, of course, cats...]

***cf IV. [[Redbook4:88-89][19871003:1650e]{Men and Animals}[3rd October 1987],] 88

****{Bear in mind that there are no spatial dimensions in God the Spirit}


[continues]

[PostedBlogger25for26022020]

{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (4)]}[20th August 1989]


[Redbook6:216][19890820:2007d]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (4)]}[20th August 1989]

.2328

The implication of this* is that the Spirit of God is present in all of Creation; and that just as the outward manifestation(?) is the fact of entropy (increasing disorder) in natural processes involving material things, so the inward manifestation is the apparently purposive, seemingly information-based integrative tendency which is found most strikingly (but not exclusively) in natural processes which we recognise as living, that is, the development of life-forms; and that the process of evolution,** which seems to be a major example of this inner manifestation, may be perceived in one sense as the increase in self-awareness of the organism, to the extent that, in Man, the organism becomes at least able to perceive the Spirit within himself*** [sic] (whether any Individual Man does so, of course, being a matter of free will).


*[See last 3 previous entries, [Redbook6:215-218][19890820:2007b]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels}[20th August 1989]ff]

**Although ‘integrative’ is not at once obviously a description of evolution, it is certainly not disintegrative like entropy; and against entropy’s descent, it clearly is an ascent.

***[cf [Redbook4:88-89][19871003:1650e]{Men and Animals}[3rd October 1987]]


[continues]

[PostedBlogger25022020]

Sunday, 23 February 2020

{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (3)]}[20th August 1989]


[Redbook6:216][19890820:2007c]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued (3)]}[20th August 1989]

19890820.2007
[continued]

The essential sign which distinguishes Men from animals* appears to be the tendency to be aware of the Divine, in one way or another, manifested in one way or another (eg cultic activities, or perhaps even simple statements).
**
This awareness, whatever Classicists may sometimes suggest, is in fact evolving all the time, both in urgency and in refinement.


*[See last previous entry but one]

**According to opinion polls, apparently, although less than 10% of the UK population attend Church, 67% feel themselves to be Christian.
(Source: ‘The Breakthrough’, United Christian Broadcasters)
[I suspect that now the proportion feeling themselves specifically Christian would have fallen, probably significantly, on the other hand the proportion believing in some kind of Deity would still be relatively high. <20191224>]


[continues]

[PostedBlogger23for24022020]

{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued]}[20th August 1989]


[Redbook6:215-216][19890820:2007b]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels [continued]}[20th August 1989]

19890820.2007
[continued]

(This [Hu]Man-like mental condition* seems curiously incomplete: the Age of Enlightenment notwithstanding, I doubt whether it is possible to be, or at least to remain, neither like animal nor like angel for long; one must, perhaps, always be moving in one direction or another. But I do not know this.)


*[See last previous entry]



[continues]

[PostedBlogger23022020]

Friday, 21 February 2020

{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels}[20th August 1989]


[Redbook6:215-218][19890820:2007b]{The Spirit in Animals, Men and Angels}[20th August 1989]

19890820.2007
[continued]

Although the statement has been made,* I think, that ‘the division between Men and animals is absolute’ (by contrast, ‘the division between Men and Angels is not absolute’),** this can only apply so far as Individuals are concerned – and even then, Men can become like animals in the freely-chosen Veiling of the Spirit within.

What I think I am trying to say [here], is that whereas Individuals of any species of animal seem unlikely to be able to rise to the spiritual status of Man (unlike individual Men, who can rise to a spiritual status like that of Angels), on the other hand a whole species may evolve in the course of time to a mental condition which gives rise to the spiritual status of Man*** – that highly ambivalent status which allows an individual of the species freely to descend to a status equivalent to that of an animal (but never without hope of redemption) or to ascend to a spiritual status like that of Angels (but never without fear of falling).
****


*in [2]

**(Quotes unchecked)
["The difference between Animals and Men is absolute. The difference between Men and Angels is not absolute, and it is possible for Men to become as Angels by the development of their inner sense."]#

***The only example known to us being, of course, Man.

****[Science would say ‘other animals’ instead of ‘animals’ by contrast with Humans (instead of ‘Men’ these days, correctly) throughout; and the idea that there is any absolute difference between Humans and other animals would not be generally scientifically acceptable. But read on:]

#[
‘“My question is: What are the differences between Animals, Men and Angels?”

After a long pause, [xS] said: “Animals are, like Men, a part of Totality, the created Universe, everything created of God: a part with awareness, and with intelligence.
Men are like animals, but with an extra sense: the ability to recognise evil, and the ability to recognise God. By evil, I do not mean social consequences, although the same actions often embody both. If an animal turned out to have this extra sense, we should be justified in calling it Human, in the moral sense. If a man does not possess this sense in any form, he is not a Man, in this sense.”

That is a sweeping statement.” The Fellow leant forward in his chair. “Are you thinking of psychopaths?”

Possibly.” [xS] agreed. “But you asked me also about Agents, and this may help to distinguish Men from animals. I perceive that you do not believe in Angels.
The difference between Animals and Men is absolute. The difference between Men and Angels is not absolute, and it is possible for Men to become as Angels by the development of their inner sense.”

I saw that the Assistant Chaplain stared at [xS].

She continued: “Angels are Spirits whose separation from God the Spirit is of a far lesser degree than is the separation of Men. For this reason Angels have a power over the Totality within which they operate which, while less than that of God, is greater than that of Men. But by the same token, as their separation from God is less, so their independence is less. Angels exist willingly to serve the purposes of God: they are his Agents. Angels are dependent on God the Spirit, but independent of Totality; Men are dependent on the Totality, but are given independence of choice from God the Spirit. Men may sink with the Animals, or rise with the Angels.”

After a long pause, the Fellow said – so quietly that I could scarcely hear him – “I think I understand how Men may become as Animals. But I do not understand yet how they may become as Angels.”

[xS] said: “It is possible for Men to become as Angels by development of the inner sense. As their knowledge of God intensifies, so the power over them of the separated World fades. So it is commonly told among Men that the greatest of the Saints and Prophets had power over the separated World, and were not subject to its restraints in the same way as ordinary Men. It is, once again, a question of degree: from the simple hermit who no longer feels the cravings of the corporeal body, in his love for God the Spirit; to the prophet who is able to see the futures of the World, and call down the power of God the Spirit over the separated World. Only complete subjugation to the will of God the Spirit achieves that intensity: and then a Man might die to Earth, and be numbered among the Angels themselves.
Angels, too, differ in the degree of their separation from God the Spirit, according to their function; and they are subject at times to the pull of the separated World within which they must operate: not so much, generally, of the material World, which they may take or leave more or less at will, with discretion; but the mental World – the mental World of Men with whom they work – causes them great joy and, at times, great distress.”'
([2] – which is subject to revision]
]


[continues]

[PostedBlogger21for22022020]

{Archetypes and Types on the Circle}[20th August 1989]



[Redbook6:214][19890820:2007]{Archetypes and Types on the Circle}[20th August 1989]

19890820.2007

It is unusual to be able to place any Individual, in terms of general character, exactly at any single degree of the Circle. This is because each Individual contains the potentiality of the whole Circle, with all its Degrees and all its Archetypes. At any time, one or more of the Archetypes may predominate in the general personality of any Individual; but it must not be forgotten that the others are also present.

Those in whom one Archetype does strongly prevail to the apparent suppression of all the others, tend to appear (in fiction* as in reality) as compelling but ultimately slightly uninteresting characters: powerful, but almost one-dimensional, arousing curiosity not so much as to what they are (as ordinary folk do), but more as to what they represent.


*including my fiction: in [2], xS is powerfully attractive (I believe) but [R] is more interesting in human terms – the Bishop and the Mistress, to me at any rate, even more so.


[PostedBlogger21022020]

Tuesday, 18 February 2020

{Love and Sex (6)}[18th August 1989]


[Redbook6:212-213][19890818:1554c]{Love and Sex (6)}[18th August 1989]

19890818.1554
[continued]
*
When I have written** of the power of Love to transform sex, to lift it onto a higher plane, this is not simply theory but practically experiential: I have experienced it.

The remarkable thing about this is that the sexual experience is lifted physically from being a merely genital sensation in erection (at the lowest and most exclusively physical) right up through the body to, ultimately, the head, and possibly even floating above the head, at the highest experienced level of sexual activity; but each level incorporates and raises the levels below it, so that in sexual activity nothing is lost, and everything can be gained, by the transforming power of Love, in a way which defies practical division between the physical (or material) and the spiritual.

So I believe that all material things can be transformed by the inner Light of the Spirit: certainly in the perception; and ultimately, I believe, in themselves.

That is not to say that the higher sensations require [sic] to begin and arise from the lower: far from it; *** since in more advanced stages of integration and development, such lower sensations will become less urgent, less important, and even in the course of Nature itself are likely to wither away.**** But this analysis is to show that for normal men and women, natural sex need not drag one down: whether it does so depends upon one’s own state and direction of mind. The actual, real effect of the transforming power of Love upon sexual intercourse is something which, I presume, is unknown to the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church; and this is a great pity.#


*[[Redbook6:190-193][19890803:0908d]{Love and Sex (5)}[3rd August 1989]→]

**ref [[Redbook6:190-193][19890803:0908d]{Love and Sex (5)}[3rd August 1989],] 190ff

***(Shades of Pauline tone!)

****{Help!}

#({?} So in [2], [R]’s fear of sexual intercourse arises, I think precisely because she has been raised above it, and feels the insecurity of her position – rightly or wrongly: feels that she has been raised above her natural position. She is, of course, a natural worrier.)
[subject to revision]


{→ [[Redbook6:268][19890918:1534]{Love and Sex (7)}[18th September 1989],] 268}


[PostedBlogger18for20022020]

{The Winged Serpent}[18th August 1989]


[Redbook6:211-212][19890818:1554b]{The Winged Serpent}[18th August 1989]

19890818.1554
[continued]

Quetzalcóatl, the feathered (ie winged?) serpent, was* one of the major deities of the ancient Mexican pantheon: originally (as early as 3rd C[entury] ad**) a vegetation, earth and water (ie fertility?) god; later god of the morning and evening star, patron of priests, inventor of the calendar and books, god of learning and writing, protector of goldsmiths and other craftsmen, identified with the planet Venus; also symbol of death and resurrection, who with his companion Xolotl, the dog-headed god, descended to the underground hell of Mictlan*** to gather the bones of the ancient dead, which he anointed with his own blood, giving birth to the Men who inhabit the present Universe.

He was a priest-king of Tula, and never offered Human sacrifice; but Tezcatlipoca, god of the night sky, expelled him by black magic, whereupon he wandered to the coast of the ‘divine water’ (interpreted as the Atlantic Ocean) and either immolated himself on a pyre, emerging as the planet Venus, or set sail eastwards on a raft of snakes (This may reflect the historical transfer of power, c10thC[entury], from peaceful priestly rulers to a military ruling class). He could appear as a plumed serpent; a bearded man; and as Ehécatl, the wind god, who had a preference for round buildings and monuments.

Most of the symbols are r~, but the link with a~ is, as one would expect, particularly strong. It was the Aztec sovereign Montezuma II’s belief that the Spanish conqueror Cortés and his men were divine envoys (of Quetzalcóatl) – because they landed in a One Reed year, Quetzalcóatl’s calendar name being Ce Acall, or One Reed, giving rise to the belief that he would return from the East in a One Reed year – which led to the downfall of the bloodthirsty Aztec culture.


*per E[ncylopaedia] B[ritannica] 23: 855-[85]6

**[ad = ce]

***{cf [[Redbook6:159-160][19890718:1601]{Deuteronomic Circles and Fertility Rites}[18th July 1989],fn****] 159 Astarte;
& Dionysus, Orpheus; Jesus}



[PostedBlogger18for19022020]