August 23, 2018 – Freeread

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 1

Understanding Goodwill

Establishing goodwill among the people is essential in the creation of the new age of peace looked for by disciples, masters and prophets for thousands of years.

DK tells us that goodwill is “an expression of the will-to-good which animates the New Group of World Servers.” (Discipleship in the New Age, Vol 1, Page 784) He says that it is less associated with the second and sixth ray attribute related to being a loving person than focusing on the will aspect.

In other words, the power inherent in goodwill is manifest when the seeker dedicates himself to manifesting an idea that will be of benefit to humankind. He says for instance, this could even be something such as a scientist working on a useful invention.

On the other hand, the standard idea of goodwill is not to be neglected for it “is the lowest aspect of the second Ray of Love-Wisdom, implemented and strengthened by the second aspect of the first Ray of Will.” (Rays and Initiations, Page 647)

We are told that those who embrace the true concept of goodwill will cause quite a conflict at first making them seem like the agents of evil rather than good to many:

“The over-shadowing of all disciples and initiates, and the consequent stimulation of their natures and of their environment, must inevitably produce conflict; the outpouring of the stimulating love of God into the hearts of men must equally and inevitably produce conflict; the line of cleavage between men of goodwill and the unresponsive natures of those uninfluenced by this quality will be made abundantly, usefully and constructively clear. It will be obvious also that when Christ establishes the “centre or focal point of the divine Purpose” in some definite place on Earth, its radiation and implementary potency will also produce the needed conflict which precedes the clarification and the renunciation of obstructions. (Rays and Initiations, Pages 617-618)

Because goodwill is an aspect of the first ray those embracing it will be seen by many centered in the second, and especially the sixth ray, as troublemakers to say the least.

Further DK says:

“Let the soporific of beautiful peace talk die out and let sane methods of establishing goodwill and right human relations precede the discussion of peace. The world talked itself into a dreamy state of idealistic rhapsody about peace between the first phase of this world war and the present one. This must not again occur and it is the task of the intelligent humanitarian to prevent it.” (Externalization of the Hierarchy, Page 444)

DK says this about a quality necessary in disciples to manifest the new age.

“For this a broad tolerance and an unprejudiced mind are essential, and these qualities are rare in the average student and the small town man. (Externalization of the Hierarchy, Page 242)

Notice that he says that a “broad tolerance and an unprejudiced mind” are rare in the average esoteric student. That is much different than the way the mass of students view themselves. Most think that because they support feel good political views that they are in the path of goodwill, tolerance and open-mindedness.

But most are not, according to DK.

That said, those who feel they correctly understand the path to goodwill need to do all in their power to reach out and extend a hand toward unity and overlapping areas of agreement. To this end Curtis Harwell and I wrote the Twelve Principles of Synthesis. Hopefully we can start here by agreeing with essential spiritual principles:

THE TWELVE PRINCIPLES OF SYNTHESIS

We believe in the equality of men and women, the equal rights of each race and in the sacredness of all life.
We believe that we have the capacity to see Eye to Eye with each other through the application of the principles of non-deception, open communication and contact of higher intelligence that lies within.
We accept the responsibility of maintaining our bodies, emotions and minds in a state of maximum health and vitality. We Seek not to hurt but to heal.
We believe in the principle of Harmlessness, for when we harm another person, we only harm ourselves. We shall not inhibit, restrain, or oppress the free will or privilege of any individual to explore new concepts and philosophies.
We believe in the principle of Free Agency, and that there is a power within that enables us to proceed with purpose and accomplish many great and important works pertaining to the coming Age of Enlightenment.
We desire to initiate a New Age of Peace, prosperity and spiritual attainment through the intelligent application of the principles of Love, Knowledge and Wisdom.
We acknowledge the Christ-God-Consciousness as the single creative source manifesting through the Universe, and that this Power lies within each one of us.
We affirm that the power of Love is the greatest unifying principle and send only the pure Love of Christ/God to all.
We believe in the principle of Service, for when we serve one another, we serve ourselves. We retain only that which we have given away.
We disclaim all totalitarian and secular controls over our lives, and affirm the power of the people to enjoy a free, democratic society with maximum liberty for the individual.
We promote World Peace through the complete elimination of nuclear and doomsday weapons, international aggression, and the eradication of world hunger and poverty.
We seek not to be separative and isolated but to unite and join hands with all spiritually-minded groups and individuals who desire to bring Peace on Earth and Goodwill to all Humankind.

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 2

Our Responsibility

Dk’s writings seem to express hope that goodwill would have taken several steps forward by now. Unfortunately, darkness has descended to the extent that the goodwill between the left and the right is a minefield compared to its existence after the World War II.

At the beginning of the Great War he said this:

“The will to demonstrate goodwill activity has not been aroused; it will be automatically aroused in the general public once the world disciples have invoked and evoked the inflow of this higher dynamic energy.” (Externalization of the Hierarchy, Page 153)

Then near the end of the War he said this:

“Unity is the goal of the immediate future; that hatred is retro-active and undesirable and that goodwill is the touchstone which will transform the world. (Discipleship in the New Age, Vol 1, Pg 65)

Now, instead of basking in goodwill with both sides of the political spectrum sending positive vibes to their brothers on the other side we have division and utter hatred surfacing, not only in the United States but all over the world.

Do esoteric students share part of the blame here? Evidently the answer is yes for in the above quote he says the world disciples have the power to invoke world goodwill.

Has it been invoked?

No. Instead it appears the little goodwill we had in the past has been reversed and buried. Now it is so bad that if the other side does do something helpful to mankind the first step is to attack, distort and discredit the accomplishment.

Unfortunately, world disciples have failed to invoke world goodwill in this generation yet unity and goodwill is supposed to be a supreme goal to prepare the planet for the reappearance of the Christ.

Since a certain amount of world goodwill is a prerequisite for his return is it any wonder that the powers of darkness have sent thoughtforms to political leaders and their acolytes that cause them to fear and attack those who are not their direct supporters?

Have some members of the New Group of World Servers also unknowingly picked up the threads of hatred and add to it with their subtle, and sometimes not so subtle, support for attack?

Obviously, someone is falling down on the job because those with power to bring goodwill have not manifested it.

Did DK think that one political side should attack the other to the extent that they would shut down or suppress their right to speak?

He said, “We endeavoured to make clear that differing forms of government and varying ideological systems were right and possible, provided that human beings lived together in goodwill and recognised their blood brotherhood. (Externalization of the Hierarchy, Page 178)

Are the political right and left living “together in goodwill?”

Many esoteric groups seem to associate goodwill with a lack of conflict. They think that if the other political side is allowed to be heard then arguments will follow and goodwill will disappear. By suppressing views of their political opposite they think they are preserving goodwill because only the views of the “good guys” remain.

This approach is caused by entrenchment in great illusion. Look at the extreme of this idea. All opposition is suppressed by the Dear Leader in North Korea. Kim Jong Un may believe that he is surrounded by people of goodwill because of suppression, but in this he is greatly deluded.

Goodwill can only be fully manifest by the Will-To-Good, not by the suppression of the will. Yet many DK students in their own sphere suppress this Will-To-Good by refusing to hear and understand the views of their bothers and sisters on the path.

DK gives us direction here:

“my group of special workers such as yourself, must contact these groups, bringing them together on one point only, and that is Goodwill. Each group must necessarily be left free to proceed with its own destiny and mode of work. Unity is a necessary ideal and is the reverse side of Goodwill. Unitedly, when the right time comes, these groups must issue a great manifesto to the world—identical manifestos being issued in each country by all the groups who stand for world unity and goodwill. Thus they will make the word “goodwill” carry power throughout the planet, whilst the disciples and aspirants will, through their thought, make the word “unity” carry hidden power. Thus a vast band of men of goodwill will be working unitedly, yet independently, and there will be made available—in moments of world crisis—an organised, ready and world-wide public opinion of such strength and organisation that it cannot be ignored. (Discipleship in the New Age, Vol 2, Page 457)

The Twelve Principles of Synthesis would be a good start toward spiritual union. Here is another possibility directed at political union which would be supported by most aspirants.

Principles of Political Unification

(1) I seek that which is good for my country and the world above that which is good for my party.

(2) I support the principle of free speech. I shall be allowed to express my political and spiritual views, however repulsive, without legal restrictions and allow all people the same privilege.

(3) I support the principle of freedom and work toward securing the greatest possible freedom for individuals and groups in every situation. I accept the principles of freedom enunciated in the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.

(4) I commit myself to sending goodwill and the spirit of friendship to all involved in the political process, especially those with differing political views.

(5) Even though the majority may not always support my views I realize that the majority view, when people are properly informed, rarely will lead us on a dangerous path. I therefore seek to honor the will of the people. When I disagree with the will of the people I will not seek to forcefully control them or change them but will use peaceful means to inform and educate them.

(6) There are a number of issues that cause division, heated debate and anger. Examples are abortion, gun control, social programs, drug legalization, military activities and others. Most cannot be resolved in the near future through the conversion of the other side to another. I support this unifying approach: To support the principle of fairness on controversial issues both sides must be heard even though the other side may be repulsive to me, for free speech and thought is the most important principle and the prime directive of unification and ultimate peace. I therefore commit to the principle of fair play realizing that both sides deserve to be heard and have their representatives in positions of power.

(7) I believe in integrity and honesty and will seek to be truthful no matter what the opponents do. I seek not to distort or lie for the benefit of my party or for personal gain.

(8) I accept that we must be fiscally responsible and will do all in my power to create a balanced budget, except in times of national crisis. I will only support programs that can be funded or continued without increasing the burden on the taxpayer.

(9) I agree that the people are taxed enough and seek to keep the budget within the range of current tax revenues (or preferably lower) and to not raise the percentage of taxes on anyone.

(10) I agree to put the security of my country and the world above the views or actions of my own political party. If others of my party sabotage national security or undermine a just effort toward the elimination of threats I will be just as critical of them as the opposing party.

(11) I accept the fact that there is great waste and inefficiency in government spending and commit myself to eliminate waste and increase efficiency wherever and whenever possible.

(12) I accept and support the idea that we can save ourselves much grief by learning from the mistakes of history so we do not repeat them. It is therefore of extreme importance that the youth be accurately taught, without censorship, national and world history in a way that is of interest and will be absorbed by them. I will oppose all those who revise history in distorted fashion for political gain.

(13) I agree that extremism has been and is the cause of many problems in the world and seek to not impose extreme views on the people. If I happen to have extreme views which I believe to be of value to will seek to persuade by education rather than by law or force. It is also a problem when political opponents are called extremists when over a third of the public support them. Such accusations are extremism in disguise. I seek to not be extreme myself in distorting the image of opponents by calling them extremists when such is not true. For instance, it is not extremism to be simply for or against abortion as there are many on both sides of the equation.

(14) I support the elimination of poverty but realize there are two approaches to this. The first is to give a helping handout and the second is to provide circumstances so the person may help himself. Extremists on this issue have warred against each other and have been the cause of much division. I reject extremism on both sides and seek to recognize the value of both sides. There are times of helplessness when people need direct assistance and times when they need encouraged to stand on their own feet. I do not support handouts to those who are capable of helping themselves and refuse to do so.

(15) I support the separation of church and state, but reject extremism on both sides. I reject the extreme that the government should endorse any specific religious influence on public policy even though all religions have the freedom to express their views. I also reject the other extreme that any mention of God, religious values, or the public display of religious symbols is to not be tolerated.

(16) I support equal rights for all races, both sexes and members of all religions and ideologies. I recognize that the large majority both sides of the political spectrum seek what is best for all races and minorities (even though the opposition has a different approach) and refuse to manufacture accusations for political gain.

(17) I recognize that the large majority both sides of the political spectrum seek what is best for the environment but again both sides have a different approach. Two extremes causing division are: First aiding then environment even if there is strong economic and job loss. The second is seeking profits at the expense of the environment. The truth is the two are interdependent. A strong economy can provide funds to help the environment and a healthy environment provides for a good long term good economy. I seek therefore to work with both sides of this issue and will seek cooperation rather than assigning blame. I seek to aid the environment without harming the economic structure.

(18) I recognize we are a nation of laws and will not support the subversion of law for political gain. I will condemn such subversion of those who share my views as well as those who do not.

(19) I will only support the establishment of necessary law as well as the elimination of bad, as well as useless laws that clutter the system.

(20) In the end, I support the example of John Kennedy who, while campaigning, found good things to say about his opposition and instead of tearing down he said “we can do better.” I support the idea of converting by good works and ideas rather than tearing down the opposition.

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 3

Two Versions of Freedom

World War II was preceded by a great conflict on astral and mental levels. One side (which became the Allies) leaned toward democratic government with guarantees of personal freedom, even if speaking against authority, and the other (which became the Axis Powers) believed in a concentration of power with minimal individual freedom to speak contrary to that power.

The first allowed the individual to determine his own destiny while the second felt that the leadership was smarter than the average citizen and needed to control them for their own good.

Today we face a similar division. One side wants to centralize control with more laws, regulations and restrictions while the other side wants decentralization with fewer laws, regulations and restrictions. The first leads to diminished individual and group freedom while the second leads to an increase.

One can see this division in many of the conflicts throughout history. The American Civil War was a prime example.

The interesting thing is that the side fighting for diminished freedom of the whole will never admit it. Instead, they will always make the claim that they are the true freedom fighters.

For example, the South during the Civil War made the claim that they were the ones fighting for freedom while the North were the true tyrants. Remember the words of John Wilkes Booth after he shot Lincoln which was, “Death to tyrants!”

So, how could a rebel nation fighting for the right to hold slaves claim that they were fighting for freedom? Here was their reasoning.

They maintained the blacks were an inferior race that couldn’t handle freedom and needed benevolent caretakers such as themselves. They were better off being slaves under their control than being on their own.

Secondly, they maintained that the free labor of the slaves allowed the superior white race to have more freedom and comfort for themselves.

Hence they maintained they were fighting or the freedom and welfare of all.

We can now see on hindsight that they were really fighting for the freedom of one group at the expense of others.

Hitler also maintained that he was he one fighting for freedom and often said so. In his mind he was fighting for the freedom of Germans who supported him who were superior in intelligence and would control the rest of he world for their own good.

Both Hitler and the South saw their reasons for victory as a win win for all.

On hindsight most can see that it would have been a great setback for freedom if either Hitler or the South had obtained victory.

Again, we have a tremendous astral conflict going on, but this time with two political divisions manifesting throughout most of the world. However, the epicenter is in the United States.

Again, both sides see themselves on the side of freedom. Unfortunately, there is bias on both sides which interferes with people honestly discerning where the principle of freedom lies. Many only look at their own desires. If they get their way then they think freedom prevails, even if it is at the expense of the many.

The dedicated disciple needs to understand the true Principle of Freedom which is this:

“That which manifests maximum freedom for the one and the many.”

This is freedom as seen from the right hand path. From the left hand the definition is somewhat different.

“That which manifests maximum freedom for the self even at the expense of others who are not willing to cooperate of their free will.”

When we look backwards we can easily see where the sympathies of each side was, but just before and during the conflict the vision of many were clouded.

The same applies today. Half see the selfish version as the best. The vision of the majority will not become clear for some time which would be after this conflict plays itself out and the people can again look backwards with clear hindsight.

In the meantime DK indicates that they key to preventing this conflict from materializing on the physical plane is goodwill.

At the beginning of World War II he said the cause of the war was that:

“…the spirit of goodwill was not expressed dynamically and practically, but theoretically and negatively; the aspirants of the world had no true sense of values but were content to give a little time to the spiritual life and to other people, but much time was lost in individual, personal aims. A spirit of inertia settled down upon the better inclined and upon the more understanding people; nothing that we could do served to arouse them to powerful action or to sacrifice personal temporary values to the lasting and universal values. The individual remained more important to himself than did the good of the whole.”

In other words, because of inertia the true principle of freedom had its biggest threat.

He presented steps to heal the conflict

(1) “A close personal watch over every word said or written, so that nothing said or written by any of you will have in it hate or bias of the wrong kind and your minds and hearts will be kept clear of all undesirable reactions. This is the personal and practical thing to do and the difficult task set before each of you who read my words.”

(2) “Study and apprehend clearly the issues which lie behind this conflict, so that there is no inner wavering as to the rightness of the side on which your interests lie—the side of the Forces of Light. Parallel this with an understanding appreciation of the problem of those who are bewildered by the emphasis and the dynamic activities of those through whom the Forces of materialism are working. At the same time, also, kill out all hateful criticism in your minds.”

(3) Groups claiming to support goodwill need to work together on shared positive values.

See: The Externalisation of the Hierarchy, pages 140-142

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 4

The Responsibilities of the Disciple

DK says this to aspirants:

“The function of the New Group of World Servers is dynamically to ‘force’ the energy of the will-to-good into the world; the average man and woman, responding unconsciously, will express goodwill.” (Discipleship in the New Age, Vol 2, Page 38)

Most of the DK students in existence today see themselves as part of the New Group of World Servers. But whether or not they are doing the works of such servants will be manifest in their actual actions. In reference to the above injunction one must ask:

Are they extending the hand of goodwill, outreach and cooperation in such a way that can filter down to the “average man and woman”?

So who should we be extending goodwill to?

The Master himself gave us the answer:

“For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?” Matt 5:46-47

Let us translate this into modern understanding for esoteric students:

“If you only show goodwill to those who have the same political view as yourself then what is the benefit? Do not the unenlightened biased partisans do the same? And if you are only friendly to those of your own political beliefs how is your light any greater than a typical bureaucrat?”

Furthermore, DK clarifies what is expected of the true servants of the race:

“When the contrast between the way of love and goodwill and the way of cruelty and hate is being clearly defined on earth, disciples must exercise an unprejudiced attitude. To this group comes the difficult task of standing firmly on the physical plane against that which is destructive and hateful (in the true sense of the word), doing all that can be done to bring the destructive agencies to an end and to final powerlessness and, at the same time, preserving an inner attitude of complete harmlessness and loving understanding. For, my brothers, there are principles and ideals in the world at this time worth struggling for, but whilst the struggle is on it is necessary consciously to preserve and create that field of living, loving energy which will eventually bridge the gap between the two opposing factions and groups and so enable later contact to be made. Some of you are not thinking with sufficient clarity about the issues involved, being unduly engrossed with the outer signs of the struggle and so losing the long range picture. (Discipleship in the New Age, Vol. I, Pg 771)

Good advice on several steps modern servants should be taking.

(1) Exercise an unprejudiced attitude.

(2) Take a firm stand against that which is destructive and hate – “in the true sense of the word.”

(3) Bring “destructive agencies to an end and to final powerlessness and, at the same time, preserving an inner attitude of complete harmlessness and loving understanding.”

(4) “Consciously to preserve and create that field of living, loving energy which will eventually bridge the gap between the two opposing factions and groups and so enable later contact to be made.”

Those in the esoteric community are divided into two political camps; some on the left and some on the right. What are the numbers? There is no way to know for sure but from my experience 80-90% of them are on the left and maybe10-20% on the right. In fact, the left as such a domination that when participating in the various groups it often seems that members are universally on the left.

Why is this?

Because those leaning right are in such minority that they would cause a disturbance and possibly banned from the group if they spoke up.

Normally, I say nothing political to the various esoteric groups I visit, but then I discovered an esoteric group that was organizing to discuss politics from a spiritual prospective. “Great,” I thought. “Maybe I can give political views in harmony with DK’s that will provide interesting discussion.” This I did and within a few weeks I was banned from the group with no explanation given.

It turns out that this group did not want to discuss politics from a spiritual angle at all but merely wanted to reinforce their own left wing views while attacking those on the right with no one like me to counter them.

That said the serious question that needs to be addressed is this. Which group of esoteric students are most faithfully obeying the directives of DK for the New Group of World Servers?

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 5

The Freedom to Speak

Let us go through some teachings that DK espoused with political implications and see which group of students comes closest to supporting them.

First and most important is the right to free speech.

The securing of basic human liberties is the foundation of the spiritual progress of humankind and DK spoke often about its importance:

“if freedom of speech, freedom of religion and a truly free press and radio are the outcome of this war, a great step forward will have been made by the entire human family.” (Problems of Humanity, Pg 24)

He says dark forces are on the side of “the death of liberty, the death of free speech, the death of freedom in human action, the death of truth and of the higher spiritual values. These are the vital factors in the life of humanity; the death of the physical form is a negligible factor in relation to these, and one easily righted again through the processes of rebirth and fresh opportunity.” (The Externalisation of the Hierarchy, Pg 232)

Back in the Sixties you heard both the left and the right use the word “freedom” in their dialog. That was a good thing even though it was from different perspectives.

Not so much today. When freedom is used by the left it is often in connection to how dangerous it is if not restricted. For instance, in England Tommy Robinson was jailed for attempting to tape and expose Muslim rapists. For this supposed hate they threw him in a hot prison dominated by Muslims where he had to subsist in solitary confinement on a can of tuna fish a day and dealing with feces being thrown in his cell. After the13 months his health deteriorated and he lost over 40 pounds.

Who spoke up for such injustice?

Not the left, but the right. Worse still many on the left applauded his ordeal.

The left has been doing everything in its power to shut down free speech. Having one news media (Foxnews) leaning right is too much and they make every attempt to shut it down by attacking and intimidating its advertisers.

Does the right follow these same anti free speech tactics? Rarely, if ever.

Similarly the left has tried to block the speech of radio commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and others by intimidating their advertisers.

The UK banned Savage from even entering their country, lumping him in with terrorists. He may be controversial, but he is no physical threat to anyone.

Has the right responded by a similar attack on free speech?

No.

When someone from the right has a march the left will generally have a counter march and show up in much greater numbers than the original marchers, who had the legal permit. The leftists do everything in their power including violence and blocking roads to stop them.

The right will rarely organize a countermarch to the left but merely allow the group to make their statement whatever it is.

Have you read any news reports of the right blocking streets, wearing masks and violently attacking protesters originated by the left? I cannot find an example.

A similar problem exists with speeches and rallies given by those on the right. The left has two plans of suppression for free speech.

First they will try to prevent the conservative person from being given a chance to speak.

Unfortunately, this often succeeds, but if it doesn’t then they will try to prevent the speaker from giving his address.

Berkley provides just one example of many.

Milo Yiannopoulos was authorized to speak there and left wing demonstrates showed up in great numbers hurling Molotov cocktails at officers and caused $100,000 worth of damage. The speech was forced to be cancelled because of the physical threat.

A short time later conservative writer Ben Shapiro was scheduled to speak and this time it took an expenditure of $600,000 to provide enough security to protect those who wanted to listen.

You would have thought that such steps would not need to be taken as Shapiro was not a Trump supporter and by no means radical. Even so, the left showed up again.

Thanks to the huge show of force by police violence was contained and only nine arrests of leftists were made.

Trump and supporters are accused of promoting violence by the media, but such accusations are unjust. During the campaign, before the Secret Service was available in force to secure the area, rally after rally was infringed upon by Leftists. Again, they first tried to prevent the meeting altogether but if they did not succeed they tried to enter the building and make so much noise and interference that the event would be frustrated.

Trump supported throwing the intruders out and this was portrayed as violence by many.

Where were the people on the right who tried to prevent Hillary or Bernie Sanders from speaking?

Such counter interference was pretty much non existent. There was definitely nothing organized.

Now we get back to goodwill and the will-to-good.

Would true esoteric students of goodwill support such an infringement on a basic freedom such as speech? Would they even be silent about it if they understand the will-to-good?

Yet I have not heard a peep from anyone in the left leaning spiritual community even expressing a desire to see the situation as it is and move to correct it with truth, justice and goodwill.

It is not goodwill to do all in your power to shut down free speech by force. It is not goodwill to be silent when a great injustice is committed.

I think all esoteric students need to ask which side of free speech would the dark brothers take and what would be the stand of the Spiritual Hierarchy? How can one claim to be an agent of goodwill without supporting free speech?

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 6

Harmlessness

Harmlessness and goodwill go hand in hand. These two ingredients mark a definite and observable demarcation between the tactics of the left and right hand path.

DK, who of course represents the right hand path, places much emphasis on harmlessness. There are times he supports fighting fire with fire when there are difficult choices, but given two choices he always supports the choice that creates the less harm.

If we look at two sides of an issue and examine how they handle their differences we can easily determine which chooses the least harmful path on the physical plane?

And why do I use the physical plane for reference?

Because that which is seen as being harmful on the emotional and mental planes are subjective and often misinterpreted through a biased view.

For instance, Jesus was seen as such a harmful character that they crucified him. He offended so many people that he said, “Blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me.” Matt 11:6

Then, on the other extreme, the Nazis were offended by many that they considered harmful to their feelings and thoughts.

Whereas, it is difficult to prove who did something harmful on the level of thought or emotion, harm on the physical levels is pretty black and white and easy to discern by the unbiased observer.

For instance, the Jews were seen as very harmful emotionally to the Nazis, but on the physical level they did not attack their fellow Germans, whereas, the Nazis did attack them. First they harassed them and later sent them to prison and death.

It is obvious on hindsight which group had works that ran contrary to goodwill and harmlessness.

Physical plane actions also reveal who chose the harmful path in the days of Jesus. Even though Jesus and his followers were accused of being the harmful ones it was the accusers who crucified Jesus and imprisoned and put his followers to death. Jesus and his followers did their best to return evil with goodwill.

Now let us look at the political right and left concerning harm and harmlessness. Let us hone it down to those for and against Trump to see if the right leans to the right hand path and the left to the left.

Those sympathetic to the left have done all in their power to portray Trump and supporters as being violent and the anti Trumpers as being the peaceable ones.

First we ask where the accusations of violence come from. Has Trump personally committed any violent act?

None we know of.

So where does this accusation come from?

It comes from how his enemies feel about his words. They do not like the way he says things.

On the other hand, about half the country likes the way he says things and do not see him as promoting violence, so just as in the past we have accusations of violence based on subtle interpretation, whereas what we need to look at are the actual physical acts.

Almost all accusations of violence come from Trump rallies where protesters from the left attempt to invade create a disturbnce and prevent the flow of free speech.

Picture yourself after having a long wait to attend an event, you get settled down to listen to a speech and a bunch of rabble rousers come in making noise and throwing tomatoes. Most people would grow quite impatient and support their removal even if they had to be a little rough.

Several times when this happened Trump ordered them removed from the building saying he would pay the legal expenses if there were repercussions to forcibly removing the invading protesters.

There was only one instance I can find where a Trump supporter was overly aggressive at a rally and this was not connected to any order by Trump to get them out of he building. One Trump supporter was charged with a misdemeanor for punching an invading protester. Trump was blamed for this though he said he dis not condone the action.

The important point to note is the first aggression at all these Trump rallies came by the anti Trumpers. They invaded the Trump rallies and forced the Trump people to get them removed or cancel the rally.

On the other hand, there was no effort by Trump supporters to disrupt Clinton or Bernie meetings. Can you imagine what would have happened if Trump supporters had blocked streets and invaded a Bernie rally. Such people would have been risking their lives.

If the anti Trumpers are upset over Trump merely speaking at a private meeting just imagine how much more upset they would be if their own space were invaded.

Fortunately, the Trump supporters held their peace and we do not have an example of this.

So which activity here represents the left hand path?

It should be obvious that it is the group that supports the invading of rallies to shut down speech. This is what the Nazis did to their enemies. They did all in their power to disrupt speech of opponents and instigate violent reaction. I do not recall reading of anyone, especially Jews, reacting in kind and disrupting Nazi meetings. Such a person would have been risking his life.

One thing we know that is far off the mark of goodwill and harmfulness is physical violence, especially when it is not done in self-defense.

Of course, when there are millions of people on both sides you are going to have a few odd characters that will get out of line so we need to look at the overall picture.

On the right the are maybe a dozen violent acts by Trump supporters but in all cases I can find they are lone wolfs acting on their own, often frustrated by anti Trumpers interfering with an event.

Among the anti Trumpers you have some lone wolfs also, but numerous acts are organized and applauded by many on the left including some politicians.

Breitbart is keeping a running tabulation of harassment and violent acts from the left against Trump supporters. As of the date of this writing they have a list of 555 known acts of aggression.

This list which includes many organized efforts far overshadows a handful of lone wolf acts from the right.

So where do the alternative and esoteric spiritual people stand on this issue? Do they silently, or even vocally, support acts of violence and hate by the left? Do they figure the violence is okay because Trump and supporters are asking for it? Some actually make this argument but it is the same reasoning as saying a well-dressed woman is asking to be raped.

Violence must be blamed on the violent. There is no excuse if there is no first physical aggression.

Those who have real goodwill in their hearts must condemn all aggressive acts except those in response to physical threat. This must be done whether the source of violence is on the left or the right. Many alternative folks condemn Christians for being hypocrites for not living up to the example of Christ. Let us who try to follow the path of enlightenment not get caught in the same trap.

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 7

Right Speech

Concerning speech DK advised to “gain that control of speech which has often been your goal but seldom your achievement, and remember that the most powerful factor in the control of speech is a loving heart. Wild and fearful talk, hateful gossip, cruel innuendo, suspicion, the ascribing of wrong and wicked motives to persons and peoples, and the divergences of attitude which have separated the many different nations in the world are rampant today and have brought the world to its present distressing situation. It is so easy to drift into the same habits of speech and thought which we find around us and to discover ourselves participating in attack and the spirit of hate. Guard yourselves strenuously against this and say nothing which could inflame hate and suspicion in connection with any race, any person, any group or any leaders of groups and nations.”

Externalisation of the Hierarchy, Page 82

Right speech is indeed a principle to which people on both sides need to pay attention. Unfortunately, both the left and the right spend too much effort pointing fingers at the negative speech from the other side believing that the problem has nothing to do with themselves, but only the other guy.

Let’s face it, all the rank and file will push back when pushed and use words that attack rather than words of truth, love and goodwill.

Many who claim to be non partisan say that “both sides do it” as if there were some equal division of blame, but there is never an equal division. There is always more of an ingredient on one side than the other. Previously we saw that there was more attacks of harassment and violence coming from the left. It makes sense that attack through negative speech has a similar division.

I have experienced this myself when I have visited numerous forums that claim to be open for both sides. On such sites I find much more name-calling, insults and attacks coming from the left. The right gets in a little dig now and then but they seem to try and argue more from reason and a mental level rather than destroying the messenger. The unjustifiable act of calling an opponent a Nazi also comes much more frequently from the left. Often the accuser does not seem to have any knowledge of Nazism.

I have found that the moment a person of the right merely mentions, God, patriotism, Trump, conservatism, evolution, morality, immigration or a number of issues that the left on the forum make all kinds of false assumptions and attack.

Let us take the subject of God, for example. This is a curious subject since over half of the left claim to believe in God and around 25% of the evangelicals in the United States are Democrats.

You’d think then that the mere mentioning of God would cause some of the left to defend the belief, but such is rare. I do not recall this happening once in all the political groups in which I participated. There seems to be an anti God thoughtform against which leftists should not betray.

When I speak of mentioning God I am not talking about the typical Sunday School version, but any version at all. On such forums I will often use the phrase “Higher Intelligence” since that is most universal and least offensive.

It doesn’t help. Those on the left immediately assumed from any mention of intelligence beyond human that you are a right wing religious fanatic who probably follows and donates to TV preachers.

The name I am most often called on these sites is a liar, next comes hypocrite and then extreme right wing or Nazi, none of which are have any basis in reality. I find that the name calling surfaces when you produce facts or reason that cannot be easily refuted.

When possible I look for areas of agreement and will state some, but to no avail. If you do not buy into the whole agenda you are the enemy and must be destroyed.

Yes, this name calling happens on both sides but I challenge readers to go to sites where both sides are allowed to post and see who uses the words “liar, hypocrite and Nazi” the most often.

“But, says one, “Isn’t Trump the worst example of negative speech in the history of humanity?”

Trump certainly has flaws in the speech department and uses wording that I would not consider if I were a candidate or president, but he is not the demon as portrayed by his enemies.

If you follow him closely you will notice this about him. Those who are in harmony with him and civil are treated to very positive words and praise. On the other hand, those who draw first blood and attack are immediately attacked back. This is his first ray quality surfacing to which average second and sixth ray people do not understand and easily take offense . If you do not attack him first you are generally out of his crosshairs.

If the media attacks him, he attacks back, if a friend turns against him he will do the same and if someone being interviewed attacks he will surely hear from the Donald soon.

Now some of his words and actions condemned by the media are fairly harmless yet condemned by those just looking for a way to take him down.

An example of the fake news he is always complaining about is found in this New York Times article published shortly after McCain’s death.

First here is the headline:

“Trump Relents Under Pressure, Offering ‘Respect’ to McCain”

Now, here is the first part of the story followed by the link to the whole.

“In the Senate chamber on Monday, John McCain’s desk was draped in black and topped with a vase of white roses. The majority leader, Senator Mitch McConnell, rose to praise Mr. McCain as a colleague and hero who “spotlighted many of our highest values.” Outside, an impromptu memorial took shape as the flags over Capitol Hill flew at half-staff.

“In only one building in Washington were Mr. McCain’s legacy and achievements greeted with anything like ambivalence: the White House.

“President Trump, under enormous public and private pressure, finally issued a proclamation of praise for Mr. McCain on Monday afternoon, two days after the senator’s death, and ordered the flag to be flown at half-staff seemingly in the only place it wasn’t already, the presidential complex.”

LINK to full article

Now, when you read this it sounds like Trump mean spiritedly refused give condolences or to lower the flag for McCain.

WRONG.

Here is the truth.

Immediately after his death Trump tweeted “deepest sympathies and respect” for McCain’s family.

Concerning the flag the protocol for such events was established by Eisenhower who proclaimed America should finally have some guidelines as to how long the flag should remain half-staff after years of confusion prior.

In his proclamation, Eisenhower said upon the death of a US Senator, the flag should at least be flown half staff on the day of, and day following, that person’s death.

That was the exact amount of time that President Trump initially honored Senator McCain at the White House.

Some complained that was not long enough so Trump complied and lowered the flag again. The truth is that Trump went beyond protocol to show respect for a guy who had done all in his power to sabotage his agenda.

Would Obama had done the same thing for Ted Cruz?

Doubtful.

Would he have been criticized if he just went with standard protocol?

Of course not.

Is there hypocrisy of Biblical proportions?

Definitely.

Indeed Trump is more justified in fighting back than assumed by the media, but even most supporters will admit that he is not a good example of harmless speech. A more diplomatic and harmless approach to speech would have not roused such a firestorm as is now approaching him.

That said, even if one attempts to speak in the most harmless manner he will still offend many. Just the presentation of truth in a clear concise manner will infuriate those in darkness. Just note that Jesus was crucified for being offensive.

I do not recall ever calling anyone a derogatory name yet I have roused anger in many places just expressing my views as politely as possible. As it turns out when you cross the beast of ignorance it doesn’t matter if you do it Trump-style or Gandhi, you are in danger of unlimited attack.

That said, the disciple and students of the Ancient Wisdom have no excuse for name-calling or to condone it. The key, as DK says, is a loving heart. We need to look upon the soul, or the Christ within, both of Obama and Trump, as well as their supporters and seek dialog, understanding, pure reason and open dialog as to how to reach shared goals.

And indeed, there are shared goals, but the difference often lies in how to achieve them.

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 8

Harmony Through Conflict

The Fourth Ray is aptly named “harmony through conflict.” This ray is of particular importance for this planet.

DK says this about this ray:

The fourth Ray of Harmony through Conflict is a controlling factor in human affairs at all times, and peculiarly today.

The Principle of Conflict is the agent of the Principle of Harmony and produces the strains and the stresses which will lead, finally, to liberation. … Conflict produces: War-Renunciation-Liberation. Humanity is subjected to crises of discrimination, leading to right choice.

The Principle of Conflict is today active in all nations, in all religions, in all organisations, leading to the emergence of the New Age. Conflict produces points of crisis, then a point of tension, and eventually a point of emergence.

This Principle of Conflict is preparing the way for the return of the Christ, Who will inaugurate the new era of harmony.

Rays and Initiations, Pg 639

In addition he says this:

This ray of harmony through conflict (the conflict of the pairs of opposites) is necessarily concerned with the bringing in of that vibratory activity which will lead to unity, to harmony and to right relations, and to the release of the intuition.

Esoteric Healing, Pg 132

And the keynote of the ray is:

“Two merge with one.”

So the allowance for the free exchange of conflicting thoughts and ideas is a key that leads toward both liberation and unity.

What many students fail to ask is – what would be the result if conflict is suppressed – if only one view is allowed to be expressed or heard?

Would this mean the benefits of this ray would not materialize causing division to continue and even frustrate the plans for the return of the Christ? After all he said, “This Principle of Conflict is preparing the way for the return of the Christ.”

Do many alternative spiritual people have this completely backwards, thinking that the suppression of conflict creating an artificial peace is what is needed?

Yes. Unfortunately I believe this to be the case.

The question that needs to be asked is this. Why do so many alternative spiritual people and even many DK students go so far out of their way to avoid conflict and settle for the illusion of peace and unity, instead of the real thing, that will exist after conflict is resolved?

It is basically this. Many are drawn to the Ancient Wisdom because they are seeking a more peaceful world. They want to bask in peace, love and unity that seems to be missing in the material world. As often happens though, a positive desire on an emotional level can lead to being trapped in an illusion on the mental side. By seeking to avoid the great battleground, the Kurukshetra, the aspirant is delaying his next step toward liberation.

There are certain principles that play out in the world we see about us that continue to play out on a higher level when the seeker becomes a disciple.

Right now, students of the Ancient Wisdom are divided into two camps where the principle of Harmony Through Conflict needs to be applied. One group aligns itself with the political left and the other the right.

Those on the left constitute the great majority (80-90%) and their influence is so universal among students that it seems to many that there is almost complete unity.

Those on the political right constitute a minority (10-20%) and often do not even mention their opposing views for fear of rejection, chastisement or just sensing the thoughtform and not wanting to disturb it.

Consequently, on many spiritual sites, if politics is discussed the thought is projected that only one view is acceptable. Then we have many instances where any form of political controversy is just avoided, as if none even exists.

Both of these approaches suppresses the principle of harmony through conflict.

What then should students of the Ancient Wisdom do to allow true unity to manifest from the conflict of the actual interplay of both sides?

Answer is quite simple. The majority consisting of the political left need to over come their fear of hearing contrary ideas and realize that the sincere discussion and understanding of other points of view are necessary ingredients on the path to unity.

Those on the right need to overcome their fear to speak up and not be afraid of whatever label that may be tacked on to them. By speaking up civilly and when on subject one can cause the left to become aware that there are other views out there besides their own. A free interplay of ideas will make both sides aware of the need for unity. It is essential that both sides approach any such discussion with goodwill realizing that all are disciples to some degree wanting the truth.

Is unity even possible?

Certainly. The main reason anyone has a view that runs contrary to truth is because of a lack of knowledge and understanding. If they only hear one side of an issue then such knowledge and understanding will remain static. But, when there is an honest exchange of ideas, knowledge and understanding will increase on both sides bringing them both steps closer to unity, or harmony through conflict.

To this end several of us have created a group on Facebook called “Esoteric Politics and Freedom.” So far it appears that only those from the right, or who are fairly libertarian have joined. It is a new endeavor at this point and we hope that there are some from the left that will join in and civilly give their divergent views and why they endorse them.

Unfortunately, this seems to be the only spiritual group on Facebook that invites views from both sides of the equation. Let us hope it is not the last.

The Principle of Goodwill, Part 9

The Principles of Unification

So far this treatise has presented two sets of affirmations presenting principles that can lead to the greater establishment of goodwill and unity. The first were the Twelve Principles of Synthesis. These are twelve statements designed to be accepted by adherents of the Ancient Wisdom as well as other alternative spiritual students.

The second consisted of 20 affirmations of political unity. Even though the political division we see about us seems more pronounced than ever we still have many goals in common of reaching the same end result.

Again, the goal is for both sides to be reminded that they do have many goals in common and need to more reasonably consider the means to accomplish them.

Now, I end this treatise by presenting a third set of principles designed for synthesis, goodwill and unification.

The first was designed for alternative spiritual students, the second for those of political interest and this final one is for the masses who have a religious or spiritual inclination.

In this world the various different religions place much emphasis on their differences and why their belief is superior to others. Many do not realize how much the majority of religions have in common. Presented here are16 Principles of Unification that illustrate spiritual believers have more in common than is normally realized.

The 16 Principles of Unification

I believe there is good will and a desire for peace in the great majority of people, groups and religions and accept the idea of peaceful co-existence as an ideal for which to strive. I further realize that the majority of people wish to live in peace despite their differing beliefs.
I acknowledge that there exists a higher intelligence typically thought of as GOD but referred to by a variety of names.
Even though this Being or Intelligence is called by differing names and descriptions, I acknowledge that this same God is over all mankind and that we are children of God, brothers and sisters. Essentially, humanity is one family.
I believe that the will of God would include the best possible outcome for all of humanity. The goal of “Peace on Earth, Goodwill to Humankind” is a goal I embrace.
I embrace the Principle of Love and seek to love my neighbor as I do myself. I seek to do unto others as I would have others do unto me. I seek to serve both God and humanity.
I embrace the Principle of Light in that I seek greater understanding. I realize I have knowledge of some things but do not know all things about either God or humankind, and therefore seek to know more. I believe that I can progress in knowledge and understanding of spiritual principles. I seek to ever expand my learning. I am open to a fresh outlook when greater light and truth are revealed to me.
I accept the Principle of Cause and Effect and embrace the simple idea as taught in all spiritual movements that good and loving deeds, actions and thoughts will bring positive results, while harmful actions will bring destructive results. I therefore seek to do good to all mankind that good will return to me.
I accept the Principle of Freedom. I allow all people to worship, speak and believe how, where or what they may, so long as they comply with the just laws of the land (laws which protect the whole of the people). I do not support imposing my beliefs on others by force.
I accept the Principle of Communion. Through prayer, thought or contemplation, I can gain a greater awareness of God’s purpose, God’s will and God’s love.
I believe that my existence will continue even after the death of the physical body, and therefore seek to live mortal life in such a way that the afterlife of myself and others will be a happy experience.
I believe in the Principle of Sharing to assist those less fortunate than myself. I support the elimination of poverty, disease and ignorance from the human condition that all may live abundantly. I realize that this must be accomplished through working with the free will of humanity, not through force, and that sharing includes more than the material.
I believe that true spiritual principles and facts are in harmony with proven science as is all truth no matter where it is discovered. In all situations I seek to know the truth rather than settle for that which is false.
I accept the Principle of Harmlessness and in this spirit I do not support any first aggression toward any nation, group or individual. If there is no first aggression, there will not be a second.
I support the Principle of Harmonious and Good Relationships and seek to be an ambassador of goodwill with my family, friends, groups and nations that all may benefit from contact with me. I embrace kindness in all my contacts.
I support the Principle of Honesty and seek to tell the truth consistently.
I accept the fact that beneficial teachers, innovators and servants of humanity have appeared in times past for the benefit of all and realize that others will yet manifest. I seek to prepare my mind and heart to accept the good, the beautiful and the true when they present themselves.