{Love, Sex and Marriage [continued (3)]}[27th August 1990]

[Redbook7:256][19900827:1050d]{Love, Sex and Marriage [continued (3)]}[27th August 1990]

.1050

[continued]

In terms of Love, this* implies that such a narrow marriage involves the Christian model of loving-kindness at g~, but not ἐρως,** sexual love, at j~, – and not that pure Love which is the first degree of Love, at r~. There are two further implications of this:

(1) that because all truth flows from C, loving-kindness which does not include or flow from pure Love at r~ is essentially a hollow form of Love [sic]; and

(2) that a marriage without a balance of sexual love is incomplete (and also of course likely to cause sexual frustration).

I believe that pure love at r~, or the sector c-r~, or perhaps the movement towards r~ generally, is the basis for romantic love, for ‘falling in love’. While the original intensity of this motivating (ie emotional) force presumably cannot last beyond true*** satisfaction in love, some element of romantic love, which is almost a kind of mutual worship,**** needs also to be incorporated in a full marriage.

*[See last previous journal entry]

**[See last previous journal entry but one, & [Redbook7:250][19900826:1728d]{The Three Loves}[26th August 1990]]

***[‘true’ inserted marginally]

****(ie re C?)

[continued]

[PostedBlogger3011for02122021]

{Love, Sex and Marriage [continued]}[27th August 1990]

[Redbook7:255][19900827:1050d]{Love, Sex and Marriage [continued]}[27th August 1990]

.1050

[continued]

The C[ircles] A[nalysis &] S[ynthesis] paradigm for marriage is the horizontal link across the circles between g~ and m~, joining the two semi-circles (ideally, the two hemi-spheres) along the vertical axis C-A~* (or the vertical plane F-C-I-A~ in the case of the hemispheres).

It is not correct to say that the g~ semicircle represents the female and the m~ semicircle represents the male, although there is certainly a tendency that way.

However, what does come out of the C[ircles] A[nalysis &] S[ynthesis] model is the contrast between the full marriage, which incorporates the whole circle (and ideally the whole sphere); and a narrow marriage, which is simply a horizontal link across the circle[,] between g~ and m~ – or even, I suppose, G~ and M~.**

*[The ms has M~ here, which is clearly a mistake for A~ (as elsewhere, most likely due to the coincidence of initials of fictional first names); the vertical axis is C-A~; C-M~ would not be an axis.]

**[ie lower case for Inner Circle, upper case for Outer Circle. Presumably, there can be marriages that fall anywhere between the states of ‘full’ and ‘narrow’ marriage.]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger3011for01122021]

{Love, Sex and Marriage}[27th August 1990]

[Redbook7:254-266][19900827:1050c]{Love, Sex and Marriage}[27th August 1990]

.1050

I do appreciate in these dreams* the sense of wholly integrated Love which comes with them,** a total and unconditional Love of which ἐρως*** is only a small proportion. It is interesting how, generally, as I awake from these dreams the ἐρως proportion seems to increase, usually continuing until I get up [….]. I supposed this is an inevitable consequence of waking up in bed with one’s (actual) woman – probably a chemical consequence.

I offer a hostage to fortune whenever I discuss sex, because the prurience of our culture’s interest in it is quite likely to distort any reader’s approach and reactions. I believe in absolute honesty, and so far as I can make myself capable of it I shall be absolutely honest. But I can see only too clearly the sort of conclusions that are likely to be drawn from my frankness: the sort of snide and destructive comments which are made nowadays, often without any good evidence, about the sexual affairs and hang-ups of writers in particular.

*[See last previous entry; & 2 ant, [Redbook7:253-254][19900827:1017b]{Dream: Of a Golden Girl}[27th August 1990]ff]

**[cf last previous entry but one]

***[See [Redbook7:250][19900826:1728d]{The Three Loves}[26th August 1990]]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger30112021]

{Dream: Of a Golden Girl [continued (3)]}[27th August 1990]

[Redbook7:254][19900827:1050b]{Dream: Of a Golden Girl [continued (3)]}[27th August 1990]

.1050

So far as I recall: in this dream* [W] and I were watching the scene as though it was on television or in a film (– this may be related to having discussed the identity of an actress in a TV film the day before). Nevertheless the girl in the dream was, I think, aware of us, and smiled at us, as she walked from behind the small rectangular table** (long side facing us), round its left end (her right), towards us.

She was perhaps in her middle twenties: slim, with straight blond hair down to shoulder level, with a friendly, even loving expression. I believe that her eyes were the same colour as the rest of her, because she was of course quite naked, and radiantly beautiful – a radiance of pure gold glowing through her hair, skin, face – all of her.

***

*[See last previous entry but one]

**cf T.X

[Unclear why; Tarot I seems more likely]

***(Interrupted again!)

[PostedBlogger29112021]

{Dream: Of a Golden Girl [continued]}[27th August 1990]

[Redbook7:253][19900827:1050]{Dream: Of a Golden Girl [continued]}[27th August 1990]

.1050

When I write down the details of a dream, I recapture – and presumably need to recapture – something of the quality of the dream as I write. Although I don’t suppose that this quality would be conveyed to other people through the words, it is at least partly recorded (at least by a ‘trigger’ or cue) for me, for a time.

But to recapture the quality within my mind as I write I have to be as uninterrupted as I was during the dream.

In this case,* I was interrupted so much by the children’s manic screams that in the end I had to abandon my attempt.

*[See last previous entry]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger28112021]

{Dream: Of a Golden Girl}[27th August 1990]

[Redbook7:253-254][19900827:1017b]{Dream: Of a Golden Girl}[27th August 1990]

19900827.1017

In a dream or dream-fragment this morning, I was (with [W])* aware of the radiant figure of a woman, walking I think round a table, slim of build, with fair, straight hair of medium length.....*

----

*{See also [[Redbook7:114-115][19900403:1001b]{Dream: A Shop with [xS]}[3rd April 1990],] 114}

[continued]

[PostedBlogger27112021]

{Old Ideas}[27th August 1990]

[Redbook7:253][19900827:1017]{Old Ideas}[27th August 1990]

19900827.1017

The point about going over old ideas* is that I have to, when they** come up with new points: a large part of development seems to consist of that process of refinement.

*{ref [[Redbook7:252][19900826:1728i]{Studies (3)}[26th August 1990],] 252}

**[sic]

[PostedBlogger26112021]

{Beltane}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:253][19900826:1728k]{Beltane}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

Beltane, the Celtic fire festival, was held – I must have noted this – at the beginning of May:* the eve of Mayday, in one version.**

*[ie around J~; see earlier Vols []]

**I[ndependent on] S[unday] [1990]0826:15

[PostedBlogger25112021]

{Yahweh Reflector}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:252-253][19900826:1728j]{Yahweh Reflector}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

Thinking of the plight of the foreigners held in Kuwait and Iraq* as human shields (or ‘preventers’(?)), and praying for them in my peculiar wordless way, I was suddenly** aware of the [O], as it appeared over Camp […] in [1], and initially over […] in [2], materialising over Iraq: huge, dark and terrifying; Yahweh Reflector, *** or at least his Chariot.

****

*[See [Redbook7:185][19900802:2155]{Dream: Of a military expedition}[2nd August 1990]]

**(and still, some time later, am)

***{?}

****{cf Ps[alm] 18.25-28}

[With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful; with an upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright; With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure; and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward. (– King James version of the Bible)]

----

[PostedBlogger24112021]

{Studies (3)}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:252][19900826:1728i]{Studies (3)}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

I hope I am not spending too much time going over old ideas: I don’t have the time: in the last two days I have done virtually no studying at all.*

*(cf [[Redbook7:213-214][19900813:2258]{Studies (1) }[13th August 1990]&f,] 214.

[[Redbook7:221-222][19900818:1407]{Study (2)}[18th August 1990],] 221,

{[[Redbook7:283][19900911:2033]{Studies (4)}[11^th September 1990],] 283}

[& see [Redbook7:253][19900827:1017]{Old Ideas}[27th August 1990]]

[PostedBlogger21for23112021]

{The Genders of the Trinity [continued (4)]}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:252][19900826:1728h]{The Genders of the Trinity [continued (4)]}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

The Marian cult and the Virgin Birth are therefore* highly relevant: Mary is a type of Sophia, the Spirit {–} which explains how the Spirit engendered Jesus on her: not as a male, but using her as the Spirit’s earthly form; and the Virgin Birth of Jesus of [sic] Mary is a type** of the originating ‘birth’ of the God-Creator from God-Spirit, which is about as virgin a birth as it is possible to imagine.

(I am not suggesting that the Virgin Birth of Jesus was or was not an historical scientific fact: that is a matter of history.)

*[See last two previous entries]

**This must answer the questions about whether Mary was at r~ or, for example, at c[irca] u~/m~ (Virgo) – ref earlier Vol, IV/V? … []

[PostedBlogger21for22112021]

{The Genders of the Trinity [continued (3)]}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:251-252][19900826:1728g]{The Genders of the Trinity [continued (3)]}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

Certainly Jesus – who had* to be born {either} male or female{,} and possible would not have been permitted to function, by his culture, as a female – seems to have taken pains to be non-gendered in all his actions; and certainly God the Creator in the Old Testament is ‘male’ in his characteristics, so it should not surprised us that the Spirit is ‘female’. This is supported by the identification** with σοϕια,*** the (female) spirit Wisdom; and the C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthsesis] identification of the 1^st I[nner] C[ircle] degree {r~} (where wisdom is{,} and the Spirit moves one)**** with pure Love.

I have referred to the Spirit as ‘It’{,} in order to get away from the Christian ‘He’ which I find absurd; but ‘She’[,] is wonderful. The relationship of the Spirit and the Creator, as I understand them, is similar to that of woman and man, at least as primitively understood: she gives birth to him, (because she gives birth to everyone), and he goes out and does things (hunting, farming, making); but always has her in mind and comes back to her.

*[Underlining inserted later]

**{of the Holy Spirit}

***(Sophia)

****[ie ‘one’ as an impersonal equivalent to ‘you’]

[continued]

[PostedBlogger21112021]

{The Genders of the Trinity [continued]}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:251][19900826:1728f]{The Genders of the Trinity [continued]}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

If* C is ‘neuter’ – ‘neutral’** might be a less loaded word on our culture, and in all the circumstances – and the Creator is the Father, ‘male’, the Spirit is presumably ‘female’ – as suggested in earlier C[ircles] A[nalysis] and S[ynthsesis] applications.***

(Bear in mind that this is ‘dynamic’: statically, the Spirit O is at the centre of the Circle(s), and of the Sphere of which the Creator F is the furthest point, directly behind the Centre, as viewed by the Individual observer, I,**** at the nearest point of the sphere, directly in front of the Centre.)

*[See last previous entry]

**[As originally written in the last previous entry, and amended]

***[]

****ref IV? []

[continued]

[PostedBlogger20112021]

{The Genders of the Trinity}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:250-252][19900826:1728e]{The Genders of the Trinity}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

Campbell* also quoted ‘There is neither male nor female in Christ Jesus’. In fact the N[ew] J[erusalem] B[ible] – and the A[uthorised/King James] V[ersion of the Bible] is similar – had, famously: ‘There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither slave nor freeman, there can be neither male nor female – for you all are one in Christ Jesus’.**

But I have earlier*** considered C to be neuter – neither male nor female (contrasted to A~, which is both male and female, in the context of the Circle gender-symbolism and the Sistine Chapel ceiling.

*[See last previous entry]

**[Epistle to the] Ga[latians] 3:28 (N[ew] J[erusalem] B[ible])

***ref [[Redbook7:16][19900106:0140]{The Sistine Zodiac Gendered}[6th January 1990]] 16

[continued]

[PostedBlogger19112021]

{The Three Loves}[26th August 1990]

[Redbook7:250][19900826:1728d]{The Three Loves}[26th August 1990]

.1728

[continued]

All this* fits in well with Joseph Campbells’ offering on BBC2 [TV] this evening,** on the subject to the Goddess, and Love (although I confess that the ultra-serious-minded tone of American delivery, to which I am unaccustomed, tends to send me to sleep).

I do not (unlike Campbell, I think) equate ἐρως, erotic love, with lust. And it may be that ἀγαπη and ϕιλια as the Greeks meant them are reversed here. The English description*** is the significant one in each case.

*[See last previous entries, possibly [Redbook7:247-248][19900826:1430]{Navajo Circles}[26th August 1990]ff, or at latest [Redbook7:249][19900826:1728b]{The Sacred Fish}[26th August 1990]ff]

**ref Joseph Campbell & the Power of Myth, BBC2, 900826:2050

[cf [Redbook7:223][19900820:0035]{Circle of Animal Symbols (Nietzsche)}[20th August 1990]]

***[ie, presumably, in the ms diagram reproduced above]

[PostedBlogger17for18112021]