The Three Groups

2005-7-16 06:23:00

Glad you are making yourself at home here Kati. You state:

If I go by logic that would mean if "form" equals imperfection, "no form" equals perfection. Hence God was in a state of perfection before he decided to create.

It may seem that way at first glance but let us take a deeper look.

First, creation, or cause and effect, is an eternal process and there is only the space in between creation. Thus when we speak of the point before creation we are really talking about a point between creations.

Secondly, the concept of perfection can only apply to a world of form. To say that God was perfect in the formless world is like talking about getting a suntan in the dark. You can't because there is no sun. The word perfection only applies to form; talking about perfection when there is no form is meaningless from our point of view.

Think about anything you have called perfect or near perfect: the perfect tan, the perfect house, the perfect child etc. This concept only has meaning when we are thinking about how a form looks or performs.

Conclusion:

We have the concept of perfection and imperfection in the world of form, but in the formless world of origination this concept is meaningless. Perfection has meaning when form is in the process of creation or has materialized.

On another topic I have been thinking about a subject that needs a little clarification.

Over the years many supporters and like-thinking members have defended me and the teachings I have given out in a number of ways, not only on this list but on numerous other forums and circumstances. Some have gone so far as to say something like: "This is what I think JJ thinks on the matter." Usually they are amazingly accurate when they do this.

What has saddened me is that these sincere individuals have often been attacked with the implication that they have no thoughts of their own, that they are JJ clones or non-thinking robots.

So the question to consider is this: Are such people no different than the unthinking members of a cult or a highly structured religion or movement?

To answer this we must understand there are three types of people who support a teaching or ideal.

1. Those who are indoctrinated by a system and then threatened with punishment for thinking outside the box.

A believing member of an authoritative religion is a typical example of this. He understands the basic precepts and supports them. Anything that extends beyond the basics is scary to him and going into the mysteries or speaking contrary to orthodox doctrine puts him in danger of hell fire.

In this case one member sounds like another and they do seem a little like clones.

2. Those who accept basic teachings or ideals, but are a law unto themselves and accept no apparent outside authority except that which suits their beliefs. These rely on their minds to interpret doctrine and if they are closely examined we will find that no two think alike.

These are in the circumstance where the mind slays the real and when the real is slain only the unreal remains. Each unreal philosophy is different from every other unreal philosophy.

You can see this category of individuals at play in many discussion groups on the web. Within these groups you'll see many individuals advancing their particular philosophy from the mental plane. Others of this group will sometimes agree with them and other times strongly disagree, but never will any two see completely eye to eye.

3. The third group will consist of those who have obtained a degree of soul contact. This is the group prophesied by Isaiah: "They shall see eye to eye when the Lord shall bring again Zion." [Isaiah 52:8]

Isaiah was speaking of the center between the eyebrows, the third eye, which perceives the intuitive level through the soul.

When two people perceive through this ajna center they will perceive the same principles and see the same vision.

Now here is the problem of discernment from the viewpoint of the outside observer:

To them there are only two categories. They see groups one and three as the same and group two as the only ones thinking for themselves.

Assignment:

In truth there are many differences between groups one and three. Can you name them?

What you will do matters. All you need is to do it. Judy Grahn