THE SIMPLE PRIEST

Hello, I had a moment to share this little teaching tale with all of you.  Remember–vanity is a destroyer of the Light.  For if you do not first lose your self, you will never find your self.  Merry Christmas to one and all.

***

After breakfast, the group was magically taken to the flat top hill with its circular arrangement of granite seating. From the top of this hill, one had a spectacular view of the lush country side and the Atlantic Ocean in the background. The sky was without clouds and the sun lite-up the greenery below. A small breeze was blowing out toward the ocean. Everyone chose a chair and Tristan began to speak.

“Last night, I promised to tell you a teaching tale about duty and obligation. I first heard, this tale many, many lives ago from my essence friend and benefactor, Gabriel Baal Eyt. I have not mentioned him to you for a number of reasons, but I will tell you that he is a full Elf from the central universe of universes. Yes, Anne, elves really do exist. Here goes.

“A very long time ago, parents often brought their first born children to the Great Temple so to offer them to the Hierophants so to prepare them as scribes, physicians, counselors, and priests. Many came, but only a few boys and girls were accepted after knocking upon the pylon doors and presenting the child. It was a great honor, if the Hierophants chose to take a child into Temple Service.

In order to be allowed to knock upon the pylon doors, children must be presented on their ninth birthday. The Hierophants would speak with the child in private and ask them simple questions and give simple tests. Afterwards, they would vote, as to accepting them for a one year probation period. In order to qualify, all three Hierophants had to agree. This process had been conducted without interruption for untold centuries.

After the probation period concluded, every child who did not want to stay was allowed to return to his or her parents. Those desiring to remain must commit to Temple Service for another eight years. After the second atrium period concluded, every man or woman, who did not want to stay was allowed to leave. Those who desired to stay must commit himself or herself, by solemn oath, to serve the Temple for the remainder of his or her nature life. Each understood that his or her future was now totally in the hands of the Hierophants. Only those chosen by all three senior Hierophants were allowed into the higher Work.

So the Hierophants voted as to whom they would accept unanimously. However, one young man was declined by two of the Hierophants and accepted by the most senior Hierophant. They discussed the pros and cons as to his qualifications. The senior Hierophant agreed that he was not the brightest student of the current lot, in fact, he was not so very bright at all. After much discussion, as to why the young man should not be rejected, the senior Hierophant exercised his personal privilege of accepting one student by fiat every five years–and the five-year period was ending in a few days and the Hierophant accepted the young man.

The senior Hierophant assigned the young man to maintenance of the Temple and caring for the vineyard. The young man was happy to serve the Temple and performed his simple job very well. He did not care that he was not permitted into the higher studies for he was content to serve the Temple and its Hierophants. He was permitted to the Sunday lectures and he listened and thought about the messages most carefully. He asked simple questions and was given simple answers for everyone in the Temple liked their simple and unpretentious friend.

Many years passed and the young man was not longer young. His hair was grey and he used a staff to balance himself when he walked to tend his beloved vineyard. He had learned how to make fine wine which was sold and brought monies into the Temple coffers.

One summer day, the old priest saw that a large palm leaf had fallen upon the vineyard’s eldest and most productive grape vine. The grape vine has bent over and its trunk would soon break if something was not done. The old priest removed the palm leaf, scolding it’s parent for hurting the queen of all the grape vines. The old priest wrapped the trunk with wet clay and cloth. He tied a small rope to the trunk so to begin to restraighten it.

The old priest walked to the vineyard two or three times a day so to keep the clay-cloth wet and adjust the rope. Eventually, the queen stood upright and regally greeted the sky above. The old priest was happy and glad he did what needed to be done.

That very night, the old priest passed through transition in his sleep. As his kesdjan body left his physical body, he was met by the old Hierophant who had passed many, many years previously.

The old priest was delighted to see his old friend saying, “Master, why have you come to guide me ?”

The old Hierophant replied, “Child, I am taking you directly to the Field of Reeds for your heart does not require to be weighed on the Divine Scales. Come, take my hand and we shall depart and board the Bark of the Dead and sail into the West.”

The old priest did not understand, “Master, I know I was never very wise and I know that I would have been denied service to my beloved Temple, if not for you. I am not a great and wise man as you, Master. I am just a simple and unimportant priest.”

The old Master just laughed, saying, “Child, our brethren know of a far away Temple possessing much wisdom. They declare, Sreyan svadharma vigunah panadharmat svanustitat. In our tongue, it reads ‘ it is better to follow ones own destiny, even without merit, than to follow the destiny of another.’”

“Allow me to explain. Your destiny was to a simple one, to save the grape vine which has been with the Temple since its beginning. This grape vine was given as a present from the Sky goddess to the Earth god so to symbolize their marriage for the benefit of all. If the grape vine had died so too would the Sky goddess and Earth god and all would have been lost in our world. This is why you came to be, dear friend. It was your choice to save the grape vine or let it die. As you saved its life, the universe shall continue. This was your destiny. All who find and fulfill his or her destinies are above judgment. This is the Law for our destiny’s cannot be accomplished unless one places himself or herself under the Law of Love, Love directed by Wisdom. Come, Child, let us depart.”

And the old priest and the old Hierophant left for the Field of Reeds. And the old priest discovered he was not so simple anymore and was happy.”

 

GOOD AND EVIL

GOOD AND EVIL

How the world came to be,
is not a question meant for me?

if you must, ask a light-bearing angel,
or perhaps, a demon lurking by a well.

I heard philosophers are a heady lot,
and drunkards babble about what is not.

The priest offers bread as His flesh,
mixed with wine His blood fresh.

Hedonists, ascetics, scholars, and the rest,
tout views at odds, one to the other’s best.

All I try each day is to love you God,
even though most find this quite odd.

I work to love my neighbor as myself,
even though admitting, I can find no self.

So even, if I knew the Absolute,
to you, I would remain perfectly mute.

For what benefit is such knowledge complete,
if you not help those having nothing to eat?

Ask the Good Doctor: Manners

Greetings, dear friends.  As I get a number of letters each week asking for my opinion on life events, I have decided to share such with all of you.  Of course, I maintain the strictest confidentiality.

***

Dear Doctor,

I have a question for you. Yesterday, I went to the coffee shop and found myself behind two young ladies. An older lady around 50 years old took her order before them and saw a free table and sat down.  The waiter told her like there are two ladies who are going to sit here. But, that lady didn’t care at all.  After that, the girls came,  “We’re not going to give you this place because, we booked the table earlier. So, or you leave or give us a place to sit.”  The older woman started to shout and called the manager. But the manager told her that she must get up or make space.

What is your opinion about this situation? Who was wrong and who was not?

Julie,

***

Hello Ms Julie,

Your question is most interesting for a number of reasons. Based upon current social arrangements, the two young ladies had full right to the table. The fact that they would share the table with the old lady who was incorrect speaks to their character and the older woman’s lack of character. The manager was correct. I would have done the same when I was younger.

I am impressed that the two young ladies offered to share their table with the older woman–this is very sweet and perhaps they would have learned what ‘hurt’ the lady was suffering so to act as she did. All three lost an important opportunity for spiritual growth for sharing a meal with others is a most special and important psychological activity.  Commensal eating was a big portion of Jesus ministry.

It would have been nice if someone understanding all the dynamics would have been present so to turn lead into gold.

Blessing, my dear, stay awake,

The Good Doctor

The Church of the One God

 

As R+C students and teachers, we use the term “God of my Heart, God of my Realization” so to attune, communicate, and merge with the Sacred Image of the One God closest to our personal understanding. The R+C theology acknowledges, but One God underlying this Universe, all Universes, though the form that an individual experiences such One God differs greatly between persons.

The R+C philosophy teaches that the form of God which a mystic experiences, is the personal appearance of the unknown, indescribable, infinite, endless, limitless Source. The Kabbalists call such Ein Sof, the vedic schools Brahman, and the R+C call it the Cosmic, the Absolute, the Unfathomable. The Veda schools call such God, Ishvara, Atman, Krishna, Shiva and so one.

But, few mystics or occultists are able to experience the formless Brahman, and so they discover Ishvara. The Christians call God Father, the Muslims Allah, the Zoroastrians Ahura Mazda, the ancient Egyptians Temu, and so one.

History shows us that the forms taken by Brahmin so to appear to people are endless. Moreover, theologies differ greatly over both time and space. But, a true adherent of the One God, or the Absolute Source, will not differentiate nor disapprove of theologies which are at odd with the cognitive understanding of his or her own theology.

Rather, he or she will look within to his or her heart and into the heart of an adherent of a different theology so to share a common love and understanding that all of us are children of the One God. There must be no argument, no war, no domineering, no attempts to convert by force. For the One Law says, “There is one law and that law is unconditional love for all creatures. Love under Wisdom.”

Each of us are stewards of this earth and its life forms. The One God owns everything, we own nothing. We are here to care for the world and all of its inhabitants for we are all of this world.

Such a simple idea. An idea taught by many, but heeded by few. For egoism and hoarding exist within all of us, causing war, starvation, and sickness. But, if we refuse to acknowledge our egoism and hoarding, we fail to do God’s Work, and cause even more suffering and violence.

A R+C works so to be in this world doing Good Works for everyone. He or she owns nothing and works to be the best steward possible. His or her job is to diminish world suffering because Love is the Law.

But, many are hypocrites espousing many theologies and mystery teachings. Do not be a hypocrite, for this path leads to death! Until you recognize you are a hypocrite by nature, you cannot change to be an agent of Deity.
Get off your butts and start the Work.

Blessings, Michael

Yngling’s Cut

 

I pray that each and every one following our posts, has a joyful, meaningful, and safe Thanksgiving Holiday. We thank you from the bottom of our heart.

Today, we discuss proper formulation of scientific and theological models so not to engage in stupidity. In practice, this is not difficult if one understands a very important principle, often time called the Law of Parsimony and Necessity.

The best formulation known to me is called Yngling’s  Cut: “In formulating an internally-consistent, conceptual model so to describe and predict the operation of a system, such model must be sufficiently rich so to not to exclude necessary nor add superfluous information.”

Being sufficiently rich, the scientist and theologian insures that all necessary variables are considered so to solve the problem proposed.

Being parsimonious, the scientist and theologian insures that all unnecessary variables are excluded, such being redundant , dogmatic, and superfluous.

Typically, models of theology suffer from superfluousness and dogmatism. For example, most concepts of God are embellished with political overtones and sloppy cognition Often, scientific models prove insufficient, as they restrict models to the material world alone and so flounder forever more.

The foundations of Yngling’s Cut are not new and have been expressed since the days of the Greek philosophers and early scientists. quote Isaac Newton, “We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. Therefore, to the same natural effects we must, as far as possible, assign the same causes.”

I do recommend contemplation upon Yngling’s Cut and other equivalent formulations of rational thought. Then, apply it to your own personal philosophy so to test it against the wisdom of many centuries.

Ciao, Michael

EsoBites: Ancient Source of the Fama Fraternitatis (Part 2)

EsoBites: Ancient Source of the Fama Fraternitatis (Part 2)

11/11/17

By the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s demise, the peoples of Judah and many other lands remained captives in Babylon. The great exile of peoples to Babylon was not reversed until the empire was conquered by Cyrus the Great in 540 BCE.

Though history proves that Cyprus II was an exceptionally able military commander and administrator, his policies with respect to treatment of minority religions are well documented in Babylonian and Jewish texts and historical accounts. Cyrus had a general policy of religious tolerance throughout his vast empire. He brought peace to the new empire.

His treatment of the Jews during their exile in Babylon after Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed Jerusalem is reported in the Old Testament. The Jewish Bible’s Ketuvim in (2 Chronicles 36:23).

“Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia: All the kingdoms of the earth hath the LORD, the God of heaven given me; and He hath charged me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whosoever there is among you of all His people – the LORD, his God, be with him – let him go there.”

This edict is also fully reproduced in (Ezra 6:3–5).

“In the first year of King Cyrus, Cyrus the king issued a decree: “Concerning the house of God at Jerusalem, let the temple, the place where sacrifices are offered, be rebuilt and let its foundations be retained, its height being 60 cubits and its width 60 cubits; with three layers of huge stones and one layer of timbers. And let the cost be paid from the royal treasury. Also let the gold and silver utensils of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took from the temple in Jerusalem and brought to Babylon, be returned and brought to their places in the temple in Jerusalem; and you shall put them in the house of God.”

Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, relates the favorable view the Jews had towards Cyrus in his Antiquities of the Jews, book 11, chapter 1:106.

“In the first year of the reign of Cyrus, which was the seventieth from the day that our people were removed out of their own land into Babylon, God commiserated the captivity and calamity of these poor people, according as he had foretold to them by Jeremiah the prophet, before the destruction of the city, that after they had served Nebuchadnezzar and his posterity, and after they had undergone that servitude seventy years, he would restore them again to the land of their fathers, and they should build their temple, and enjoy their ancient prosperity.

And these things God did afford them; for he stirred up the mind of Cyrus, and made him write this throughout all Asia: “Thus saith Cyrus the king: Since God Almighty hath appointed me to be king of the habitable earth, I believe that he is that God which the nation of the Israelites worship; for indeed he foretold my name by the prophets, and that I should build him a house at Jerusalem, in the country of Judea.”

This was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind him of his prophecies; for this prophet said that God had spoken thus to him in a secret vision: “My will is, that Cyrus, whom I have appointed to be king over many and great nations, send back my people to their own land, and build my temple.” This was foretold by Isaiah one hundred and forty years before the temple was demolished.

Accordingly, when Cyrus read this, and admired the Divine power, an earnest desire and ambition seized upon him to fulfill what was so written; so he called for the most eminent Jews that were in Babylon, and said to them, that he gave them leave to go back to their own country, and to rebuild their city Jerusalem, and the temple of God, for that he would be their assistant, and that he would write to the rulers and governors that were in the neighborhood of their country of Judea, that they should contribute to them gold and silver for the building of the temple, and besides that, beasts for their sacrifices.”

The return of the Jews to Judah for the rebuilding of the Temple is well known. What is not generally remembered is that Cyrus allowed others to returns to their homes, if they so desired, including, the mystical Hebrew and Hierophants of several mystery schools which brought to Babylon with Nebuchadnezzar.

To Be Continued

EsoBites: Ancient Source of the Fama Fraternitatis (Part 1)

Greetings, one and all,

Thanks to the work of many scholars, especially Christian Rebisse, the persons responsible for authoring and printing the Fama Fraternitatis have been established. For details, I refer you to Rebisse’s book, Rosicrucian History and Mysteries (see books on the AMORC site).

Still, scholars perceive the Fama as a de novo production of the authors. While, it is reasonable to presume that the narrative details, as to CRC and his Fraternity are a de novo creation secondary to insufficient factual material, the essential story is much older and dates to the Babylonian reigns of Nebuchadnezzar II (c. 605 – 562 BCE) and Cyrus the Great (c. 600 – 530 BCE).

Nebuchadnezzar was the eldest son and successor of Nabopolassar, an Assyrian official who rebelled and established himself as king of Babylon in 620 BCE; the dynasty he established ruled until 539 BCE, when the Neo-Babylonian Empire was conquered by Cyrus the Great.

Nebuchadnezzar is first mentioned in 607 BCE, during the destruction of Babylon’s arch-enemy Assyria, at which point he was already crown prince. In 605 BCE he and his ally Cyaxares, ruler of the Medes and Persians, led an army against the Assyrians and Egyptians, who were then occupying Syria, and in the ensuing Battle of Carchemish, Necho II was defeated and Syria and Phoenicia were brought under the control of Babylon.

Following the death of his father, Nabopolassar, in 605 BCE, and Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylon to ascend the throne. For the next few years his attention was devoted to subduing his eastern and northern borders, and in 595 BCE. In 594 BCE the army was sent again to the west, possibly in reaction to the elevation of Psammetichus II to the throne of Egypt. King Zedekiah of Judah attempted to organise opposition among the small states in the region, but his capital, Jerusalem, was taken in 587 BCE (the events are described in the Bible’s Books of Kings and Book of Jeremiah). In the following years Nebuchadnezzar incorporated Phoenicia and the former Assyrian provinces of Cilicia (southwestern Anatolia) into his empire and campaigned in Egypt. The kings who came after him ruled only briefly and Nabonidus, apparently not of the royal family, was overthrown by the Persian conqueror Cyrus the Great less than twenty-five years after Nebuchadnezzar’s death.

Nebuchadnezzar is the King in the apocalyptic Book of Daniel. Daniel was an exile to Babylon after the destruction of the Temple and forced exile of the Jews in 586 BCE. While, the historicity of the Book of Daniel is questioned, it is important for establishing Nebuchadnezzar’s great interest in learning, occultism, and theology and is supportive of the reports that he brought many scholars and priests back to Babylon after his conquests to Egypt and the Levant.

The flow of knowledge from the circumference of the world wheel to its hub is the first part of our tale as to the initiating source of the Fama.

TO BE CONTINUED