Before I comment on Christopher's last post, I want to say that I have actually agreed with several things he has said lately -- among them a couple of quotes from our present discussion:
"I would never secretly hold up the one who had died as an angel gone to heaven [...]
to do so is for the survivor to grow up with the belief that it is 'second best to an angel.'"
"And this can lead to a death wish and suicide attempts [...] in order to get the attention of the parent."
Today Chris writes:
"The Middle Way is a philosophy which is recorded in the writings of philosophy which go back thousands of years.
"It would seem that both Rick and JJ find argument with the philosophies of perhaps three of the greatest Christian Mystics of all time; St. John of the Cross, St. Terese of Avilla, and Meister Eckhart.
"Who wrote of giving up all ideas or notions as to the nature of God [...] and espoused the practice of doing whatever you do with no expectations of any outcome.
"It would also seem that JJ has invented a 'Middle Way' which goes against the philosophy taught as a fundamental tenet of Buddhism by that same name."
It does not matter who has taught what and how revered they may be. If a person accepts a teaching just because it comes from one proclaimed as an authority, then he has received the mark of the beast in his forehead and becomes a follower, a beast trailing after his master. He who follows the true Middle Path accepts the soul as his only infallible authority and if such a disciple appears to be following a leader, it is only because the two see as one through the eyes of the soul.
So, if the extreme left wing has no rules and the one in the Middle has no rules, what is the difference between the two? There is a difference between the two and it is a big difference. He, who sees no rules or laws that apply to him, acknowledges no cause-and-effect which is the eternal source of all laws reaching into all realms of existence. He who sees no need for laws has not found the Middle Way, but he who is on the extreme (left or right) always thinks he has found the Path, or the Middle.
Buddha had two sets of teachings. One was for the inner group and the other was for the masses. Many of his teachings for the masses have been preserved with normal alterations over time, but the basic teachings are there. These teachings form the basis of all the outward teachings of Buddha as presently constituted in world teachings. Then he presented a second set of more esoteric teachings that have not been released to the world at large, but many of them are preserved to this day in ancient monasteries. A more complete presentation of his Middle Way will be revealed when his hidden teachings are revealed, but even then they must be studied under the light of the soul to be understood.
You speak of mystics who taught "and espoused the practice of doing whatever you do with no expectations of any outcome." Many have justifiably taught in this direction, but not in the light in which you have presented it.
There is a principle involved here and to get to the truth of this we must look at the principle in the light of the soul. When the principle is seen in this light, the see-er will know more about it than he who has read every book on the subject.
One thing that is consistent with all the great sages, and registers with the souls of most men and women, is that within the mind of God, there is a great Plan. This is mentioned often in the writings of Alice A. Bailey, H.P.Blavatsky, and others. The Bible also talks about the Will of God which implies a Plan of God. My dictionary defines a plan as "a scheme, program, or method worked out beforehand for the accomplishment of an objective." A plan therefore implies an expectation of a certain specific result. The fact that God has a Plan implies that he has an objective, and that he is expecting certain types of results.
We are told that we are in the image of God or more literally "reflections of God." As reflections of God it is our natural inheritance to create plans and expect those plans to materialize. If planning and expecting results from that plan is our natural inheritance as Sons and Daughters of God why then have sages seem to have told us to not expect results?
The answer is that they have not. The sages, who saw the principle correctly through the eyes of the soul and have transmitted it to us, have not told us "to not expect results," but to not be attached to results. Expecting results, and being attached to a certain outcome are two very different things. It is true, indeed, that enlightened ones have taught us to release ourselves from attachment. The key to understanding is that one can expect results, yet remain detached from the result.
Let us use an example of an artist painting a picture to illustrate. To paint a picture of beauty the artist first creates a plan for the picture. He then follows the plan and expects certain results. This expectation is similar to the principle of faith in that there can't be any beauty created without there first being an expectation of beauty. Suppose the artist makes his first draft and it does not turn out as he envisioned.
Now if the artist were attached to the result, he would become angry and possibly give up on the project in frustration. If he is not attached, he merely accepts that what has materialized is the result of cause and effect. If he wants the original plan to materialize, then he must change the causes.
He who is attached to the result is also attached to the cause; therefore, he refuses to change them. Then the artist is frustrated in materializing the original plan. He, who is not attached to outcome or the time frame involved, changes the causes as necessary until the plan (or picture) is manifest.
But even as the plan manifests, just as hoped for, the Master Artist is still not attached even to a finished product of beauty. Perhaps now he can visualize an even greater beauty, and he introduces new causes, even producing a more beautiful finished product than first envisioned.
The artist who has no plan, no expectations, and follows no rules or laws, will not create a thing of beauty; but such a person corresponds to one mixing several colors in a bucket and throwing it at the canvas. The artist who creates a plan and follows through with flexibility because of non-attachment is the one who creates the masterpiece.
Is this teaching not delicious to the taste of your souls my friends?
Copyright © 2000 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved