posted May 16, 2007 01:13 PM         

I like the new name.

I think its really cool that you are thinking about these things and asking these questions. Here are some of my thoughts...

Jesus was definitely a pacifist. As far as I'm concerned, this much is indisputable. He states this categorigally in the Sermon on the Mount:

You have heard it said,
An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

But I say to you, Do not resist evil:
rather, if someone hits you on your right cheek,
turn and offer him the left one as well.

And if any man will sue you at the law,
and take away your coat,
let him have your cloak as well.

And whosoever would compel you to go a mile,
go with him two.

Give to him that asks of you,
and from him that would borrow of you
do not turn away.

You have heard it said,
Thou shalt love thy neighbour,
and hate thine enemy.

But I say to you,
Love your enemies,
Bless those who curse you,
Do good to those who hate you,
And pray for those who use and persecute you;

Then will you be the children of your Father in heaven:
for He makes His sun to rise on the evil and on the good,
and He sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

But if you only love those who love you,
what reward have you?
Do not even the publicans do the same?

And if you salute your brothers only,
what do you more than others?
Do not even the publicans so?

Therefore, be perfect,
even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

Matthew 5:38-48

About religions:

All the major religions agree on some fundamental points. When you study religion seriously, you find that there is an esoteric (inner) teaching, and an exoteric (outer) teaching. The inner teaching is for those who have a transcendant understanding of the basic principles behind the stories and dogmas of the religions themselves. The stories of religions are myths, and they are only important for the truths they communicate. For people who cannot perceive truth in its purest, most abstract state, who cannot "believe without seeing", the stories and histories of religions are a necessary form. But they are just a form; a shell, and not a pearl. The pearl is not Jesus, or Buddha, or Krishna, or Muhammed, but all of the above; the pearl is the idea(l) for which these figures stand; they are symbols, and their lives are symbols, for a perfection which is greater than any of them.

I say they are myths and symbols, but they are not unreal. They possess a reality superior even to our own. As thought forms, they have imprinted themselves on our collective unconscious. They dwell within us, as the planets, the gods, do. As archetypes, they live a life subterranean to ours. And the lives they live, within our souls, are, more or less, identical to the lives they live in the religious stories. Those stories are metaphors, or interpretive images, of actual psychological/spiritual processes taking place in every one of us at this moment. When we call to mind the image of a Jesus, or a Buddha, we call upon all the finest senses within us; all that is truly noble, heroic, compassionate, and divine. We literally and figuratively dialogue with these archetypes, and, in doing so, we allow ourselves to be taken over by them, and to humbly involve ourselves in the process of their ongoing incarnation within us.

I don't know if you saw my response to your other post to me on religion. I will repost it below. I hope I've not repeated myself.

posted May 16, 2007 01:28 PM         

NON-RESISTANCE

There are only a few New Testament commandments about which Jesus warned that whoever breaks them and teaches others to do so would be called least in the kingdom of heaven.

Our Lord said, "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the Kingdom of heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven" (Mt. 5:19). What are these commandments? Some of them are clear commandments concerning non-resistance: "Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain....Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you....For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? (Mt. 5:38-46)."

Many Christians, including church leaders, ignore these commands and Jesus' warning to not break them or teach others to break them. In these last days of apostasy we are like God's people spoken of in the book of Judges when "every man did that which was right in his own eyes." Many Dispensationalists rationalize and say that was the sermon on the mount and does not apply to us. Let God be true, but every man a liar (Rm. 3:4). The apostle Paul said that the armor of God (in this dispensation) is "truth," "righteousness, "the gospel of peace," "faith," salvation," and "the word of God" (Eph. 6:14-17). Inspired by the Spirit of Christ, Paul wrote, "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: for the weapons of our warfare are not carnal...." (2 Cor. 10:3-4). In other words Paul is saying that though we live in the world we do not wage war as the world does. "Recompense to no man evil for evil....avenge not yourselves, but overcome evil with good" (Rm. 12:17-21). And in Ephesians 6:12 he said, "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood."

Most Christians today do not accept the New Testament doctrine of non-resistance. Many refuse to see the clear teachings on this matter, or if they do see this truth they do not apply it to their lives. Under the Old Covenant God's people were not non-resistant to their enemies. But under the New Covenant we have a much higher calling than the Old Testament saints.

The term "non-resistance" comes from the words of Jesus when He commanded, "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil" (Mt. 5:39). The context clearly shows that our Lord is speaking of not resisting an evil person. This in no way means that we are not to resist the temptations to sin, because, of course, all of Scripture is against that and can be summed up in the inspired words of James, "Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you" (James 4:7).

Scriptural non-resistance is not pacifism. Worldly pacifists primarily oppose war but will march, protest, picket, and obstruct the flow of pedestrian traffic, etc. A pacifist, while opposing war, would not necessarily abstain from going to court against a neighbor or defending himself or his property if attacked by a robber, for example.

In the Old Dispensation God at times commanded His people to kill their enemies. The calling of those saints certainly did not include non-resistance as it does under the New (and better) Covenant.

Jesus and His earthly ministry was the epitome of non-resistance, even submitting to suffering and death of the cross from which He could have delivered Himself by calling thousands of angels (Mt. 26:53). When the men came to arrest Jesus, Peter wielded his sword and cut off a man's ear. Jesus rebuked Peter and said, "They that take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Mt. 26:52). Later, Jesus told Pilate "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight...." (Jn. 18:36).

Jesus' kingdom still is not of this world and it is only the disobedient servants of His that fight, whether in personal combat or dropping an atomic bomb on thousands of men, women, and children.

Jesus and the disciples were traveling and planning to stay in a village of the Samaritans, but they were not welcomed. James and John said, 'Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of" (Lk. 9:51-55). Many professing Christians today do not know what manner of spirit they are of.

Many Christians say, "Well, if a robber comes into my house and tries to take off my stuff, am I supposed to just stand there and let him?" The answer is, Only if you want to obey the commandments of Jesus. Christians will often dream up some hypothetical situation in order to try to make the command of God of none effect. In the book of Luke is recorded more of Jesus' words on the subject: "And him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again" (6:29b-30).

Jesus said, "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal....for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also" (Mt. 6:19-21).

God is sovereign. Ask him to protect you and your family with His holy angels. No one can even touch you or your family or your possessions without God's knowledge and Him allowing it.

Some would say, But what about going to war to defend this country and democracy? The simple answer is that our citizenship is in heaven. We are (or should be) merely sojourners---pilgrims and strangers. Could you imagine yourself being like Jesus and at the same time leveling rifle sights between the eyes of a Russian soldier who is also a Christian brother and blowing his brains out? And concerning democracy, the political environment in which God places us is of little eternal consequence. As citizens of heaven it is not our calling to defend any particular political ideology. The end result of democracy, which is rule by the people, is the right for women to kill their unborn children, the right to publish and distribute pornographic literature, the right to broadcast sensuous and immoral acts on television, the right for homosexuals to teach in the public schools and parade down the middle of the street (with a government-issued permit) carrying placards and flaunting their sin, ad nauseam. (Please read article titled Democracy---A Scriptural Perspective.)

Peter, inspired by the Spirit of Christ, wrote, "For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow His steps...who, when He was reviled, reviled not again; when He suffered, He threatened not; but committed himself to Him that judgeth righteously" (1 Pet. 2:21-23).

posted May 16, 2007 01:38 PM         

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I agree, in part, with your impressions of Jesus and his message. His message, as I understand it, is two-fold. The first thing is Love, the second is Oneness, or, the inter-connectedness you speak of. The message of Oneness is contained in the message of Love, and vice-versa. If a person focusses on either of these, the other will come into view, but, if a person keeps both in mind, they can strengthen each other. Most, if not all, blocks to Love are the result of an ignorance of Oneness. And often it is Love which encourages us to perceive the things that link us, and all things, together.

"Do we need heroes?" I think we need ideals, and it helps greatly to reflect upon an image of an individual, like ourselves, who embodies those ideals. It may be better to envision one's own higher self, than to envision another person, like Jesus. In this way, we make the connection, that this is not something removed from our experience, but, rather, it is something we ourselves are in the process of becoming. I think, in idolizing another person, there is a danger of "compartmentalizing" our ideals, and, in a very real sense, putting the responsibility for fulfilling or embodying those ideals on that other person. We can become satisfied with "worshiping" those qualities in another, and, in time, even worshiping that other, while losing sight entirely of the qualities which make that person great in the first place. So, envisioning our higher selves may be a way to avoid that pitfall. Although, when we wish to share our ideals with others, it helps to have a common vision, and "Jesus" provides us with this. It would be rather silly to ask others to imagine my higher self, or your higher self, lol. It makes sense to encourage others to imagine their own higher selves, but, the difficulty here is that, everyone has a different image in mind. This is not intrinsically a problem, but I dont think most of us have evolved to the point of being able to acknowledge all these higher selves as embodiments of the same qualities. Since what is essential are the qualities, the virtues, we wish to embody, it makes sense not to emphasize the differences between the images used to embody them. This is precisely the problem facing religion today, when people who envision one avatar cannot relate to people who envision another avatar, despite the fact that both are intended only to be representatives, or symbols, of the same virtuous ideals. It may be that, when Westerners envision Christ, and Easterners envision Buddha, it is not much different from two individuals envisioning their own higher selves, and expecting each other to welcome their vision, and, in some cases, to abandon their own higher self and replace it with the other's. It is important not to be too attached to the image, and to always remember the ideals for which the image stands. Then, when you speak with a Buddhist, you may speak of Buddha, and, when you speak with a Christian, you may speak of Christ, (and when you speak with a Hindu, you may speak of Krishna, etc.), but, each time, you are really saying the same things, because what you are really thinking and speaking of are the ideals for which those images (respectively AND collectively) stand.

Your thoughts about repression are intriguing. I do not know enough about that to speak of it. I can only agree that it does take a long time to create divine love in ourselves. In fact, as we grow, our ideal grows too. It is always many steps ahead of us, and so, it is really never attained, which is why it is wise to consider that our work here is not about attaining, but continually approaching. In China, there is a popular image of "The Ladder to Heaven", depicting the successive levels of virtue one must pass through in order to attain the divine. One revelation that came to me from studying Jesus' words (specifically, his words about the Pharisees and his words about the forgivenss of sins) is that, the height to which a person has climbed suddenly means nothing if that person is standing still. A person much further down the ladder is greater in His eyes if that person is still climbing. It is just as difficult to climb the lower rungs as it is to climb the higher rungs. Our idea and experience of Heaven is always growing, and is never attained; what is essential is that we are always trying. The Stoic philosophers of ancient Greece and Rome had this in mind when they refused to distinguish between "greater" and "lesser" vices. They felt that to consider some vices as "not so bad" would only encourage a person to be complacent in committing them. The essential thing is to approach virtue, and abandon vice, ceaselessly, in whatever way presents itself in the present moment.

I'm happy for you, when I hear that you are beginning to make peace with your family, and understand why they are the way they are. This has been a struggle of mine, as well. It shows your maturity. Please, give yourself time with this. You are very Plutonian, like me, and resentments run deep. Sometimes, even though you can see clearly the reasons to forgive and let go, it is still very difficult. It is unpopular around here to think of people as victims, but, I believe there is a place for it. When I feel victimized by my parents, it hepls to consider them as vicitms, in their own right, of their parents (my grandparents). This is one interpretation of Jesus' words, "The sins of the Father shall be visited upon the son," (although there is a deeper, esoteric interpretation as well). Every generation is weighed down by the sins of its ancestors, just as it is lifted up by their accomplishments. When we consider this, it is easy to see how "we are all in this together". But, as I was saying, just because we see this, and understand it intellectually, does not mean we are ready to fully transcend its effects on a psychological and emotional level. We will continue to feel anger, resentment, blame. And, because we now understand that these feelings are illogical, we may be tempted to repress them, and even feel very guilty for having them. So, just be careful with that. You will learn to forgive in your own time. There is no rushing it. The important thing is not to punish yourself any further for the negative feelings. They will come up, from time to time. Just let yourself feel them, without repressing or denying their reality and importance, and, when you are ready, return to the contemplation of Love.

My advice to you (which you are, of course, free to disregard) is not to trouble yourself too much with Rumi. I think that the things he speaks of are very different from the things others speak of. With other matters, one may probe and dig and discover their meaning eventually. But, with spiritual matters, often, the harder you look for it, the further away it gets, or, else, it is reduced to something purely intellectual, no longer spiritual. What you are meant to "get", will practically jump out at you from the page. Nobody can understand everything Rumi wrote at the height of his inspiration, not even Rumi. Just pass over the things you do not understand, and you will come quickly to the things which are intended for you at this stage of your journey. That is what I think. But I could be wrong. Perhaps it is a part of your journey to look and not find, and learn these things yourself. Or, perhaps you will find when you look. I don't know.

To answer your questions about religion...

Religions form around a nucleus, which is the "religious experience". An individual attains a high level of spiritual comprehension, and speaks to others from this place, never intending to inspire the creation of a religious system, but aware that it is inevitable. When a person is illumined, life becomes religion. There is no need for empty rituals; to pour the spirit into them. The spirit is everywhere, and every action, however small, is imbued with the importance of ritual. But, for others, ritual, and the observance of religious rites, is like a set of training wheels, used to hold them up in the religious feeling, until they can learn to pedal, balance, and hold themselves up by their own speed. All religions forget their source in time. All religions become empty forms. At a certain point, the spirit grows and desires to overflow the rituals, and even the religion itself. When people cling to the rituals and the religion, they cling to a corpse (and not a holy ghost), and this moment is lost; then even the rituals become hollow, and lose the power to invoke the spirits of those who first inspired them. Just as the body of Christ had to incarnate and die, religions have to "incarnate", to contain the spirit for a while, and then die. But, the moment when the religion dies, it actually attains itself, and accomplishes its greatest triumph! It will ressurrect itself in spirit, it will come to people in spirit, and, in time, it will incarnate in another form. When Christianity dies, and is replaced by something else, something which resembles what Christianity was in its beginnings,... that will be a second coming of the Christ. ((But, again, there are multiple interpretations for theological ideas, and "the second coming" has at least a few I can think of.)) I hope I answered some of your questions on this.

Blessings,
HSC

posted May 16, 2007 06:36 PM         

- C.G. Jung

posted May 22, 2007 08:30 AM         

quote:

---

"I, for one,
do not wish to make the mistake
of blaming religion for what men have done to it."

- C.G. Jung

---