The Logos and Return of the Christ

The Logos and Return of the Christ

A reader says this: “I would hope that no one here is waiting for a messiah of some sort.”

And why would it be wrong to look for a Messiah, or a teacher who is able to give us knowledge and stimulate consciousness that we have not had before?

It is the eternal way of things that those who are further upon the path must extend a helping hand to those not so progressed as themselves. Then this person is also assisted by one higher still.

It is completely logical to expect the Christ and his Hierarchy to return. Do you think the entity that walked the streets in Jerusalem just evaporated into the ethers and is incapable of manifesting on the earth again? Of course not. He still exists and will work with humanity as opportunity presents itself.

Next, he accuses the group of repeating a Piscean mindset.

Perhaps you and I have a different understanding of what is Aquarian and what is Piscean. Tell us what Piscean repetition you see here?

To expect the return of the Hierarchy is certainly not Piscean, but to see it accurately is very Aquarian.

It is always true that every group will contain some individuals with the consciousness and attitudes of the passing age but the teachings here are centered on the mind and pure reason which is very Aquarian.

Question: If a logos was once a man, as you teach, that would seem to contradict your “molecular” evolution idea of lower kingdoms joining together. Could you please clear up your take on this aspect of evolution?

Jesus had a molecule of twelve units that had a group consciousness. Even so, he was the hierarchical leader. After he left, Peter became the leader. As various molecular orders are created, we will have both group life as well as the individual life continue, and progression of both will be actively pursued.

There are two components of the Planetary Logos. First it is a composite of all the lives upon this planet. We could call this its lower self. The second is the Ancient of Days who is an entity who has, in the distant past, passed through the human kingdom. When esoteric writings speak of the Planetary Logos they sometimes refer to the composite life and other times to the individual life of Sanat Kumara. He is the deciding point for the consciousness of the entire planet and has evolved way beyond any ordinary mortal. He has a molecular relationship with six other great entities who are his disciples. This creates a governing molecule of seven and all seven partake of the properties of the greater life it creates. They preside over the Council at Shamballa where other great ones reside who are of one mind.

The Logos is capable of blending his consciousness with the entire planet so it is as if he and the life of the earth are one. He can tune in to any one of us at will. He, as a master of group consciousness, teaches it to disciples who again pass it on to those who are ready.

Our Planetary Logos is a disciple of the Solar Logos. The Solar Logos uses the Molecule of Seven which is presided over by the Planetary Logos as a vehicle for extending his consciousness to all the lives upon the earth. Shamballa in turn is molecularly linked to intermediaries called Nirmanakayas. These in turn are linked to the Christ and his Hierarchy who are also molecular. These in turn are seeking to link the kingdom of God with the human kingdom through a molecular order.

Hope this helps. I see no contradiction. Let me know if further clarification is needed.

Question: Why did the Christ overshadow/consciously channel through Jesus, instead of taking up form in His own vehicle or body? Was the Christ not able to work through a body of His own 2,000 years ago? If not, why?

DK tells us that one of the main reasons is the time factor. If an avatar incarnates, he wastes 20-30 years in the relearning process. If he lets a disciple prepare the body with the necessary learning recorded in the brain he can save several decades of time that he can apply to other necessary work.

I believe there are other reasons also. A direct incarnation of an avatar would require a certain quality of karma as well as consciousness from the people he will encounter.

Question: Why will the Christ be able to manifest into form or a body of His own when He reappears in the future, when He didn’t or couldn’t do it over 2,000 years ago?

We do not know for sure if he will come in a body of his own. This is not given. Disciples hope this will be the case but it is entirely possible that we are not ready for this yet. It will probably happen at some time during the next thousand years in which Christ will work with humanity. There will definitely be an overshadowing of certain disciples in preparation for this.

The gathering of lights needs to be securely under way by 2025-2030. (written in 2006)

A gathering is necessary to prepare disciples to receive higher things from the Christ.

Sometime between now and then he will either overshadow or co-occupy the bodies of disciples. This is the way he came last time.

It is always an option that he will come in a body of his own but whether or not this will occur has not been given. I assume that if it does not happen in the first part of his reappearance that it could happen later on.

You can get everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want. Zig Ziglar, “Secrets of Closing the Sale”, 1984

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

Beginnings and Endings

Beginnings and Endings

A reader challenged the teaching that if there is a beginning there must be an end by stating: “I can write a poem that did not exist before, and ever after it exits.”

You gave the poem a form just as a musician gives a song a form, as I mentioned earlier. In other words, the idea which is eternal incarnated into the body of words of form on a piece of paper, a computer or some other form. Such form has a beginning and end, but the idea or basic concept has no beginning or end.

It may seem that when the poet writes the poem that this is a beginning to its existence and that it will have no end. Now the poem, The Charge of the Light Brigade is here and it is here to stay. Not quite. There will come a time that every piece of paper, every computer and every brain it is recorded upon will be no more. There will also come a time that the Charge of the Light Brigade, as happened in our history, will have no relevance to anything. When this round, world, system ends the poem will be no longer in incarnation, yet the idea will remain. Then in some future creation there will be a similar charge of a Light Brigade and another one like Tennyson will capture the idea out of the higher planes and give it a new incarnation.

Even so, the eternal essence, which is you, will find some type of incarnation worlds without end.

Then he gives another example: “I can shine a laser off into space and its energy continues on without end, though it definitely had a beginning.”

The light will not continue without end. The photons of which it is composed will eventually land somewhere and change form. Then at the end of the universe all light will be transformed in a great black hole to prepare for another creation. The basic essence which creates light never had a beginning, but the form (photons) has a beginning and end.

Then he gives a third possibility: “I can learn to do something that I didn’t previously know how to do, or conceive of something that wasn’t previously within my scope (or “ring-pass-not?), and assuming my memory isn’t erased that knowledge will not end.”

Actually the apostle Paul disagrees with you. He says, “…whether there be prophesies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease, whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” 1 Corinthians 13:8

The idea behind all knowledge is eternal, but our need for its use is temporary and passes in and out of incarnation. When we need knowledge, we acquire it in our brains. When the need for it no longer exists then we let the knowledge go. As we go from point to point in our journeys through this universe, we have an unlimited number of beginnings and endings, but as long as form is involved the form, or incarnation of an idea, has a beginning and end.

Next, our friend gives this example from Jesus of a beginning with no end:

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” Matthew 24:35

When heaven and earth pass away then all the written and spoken words of Jesus will also end, but the ideas and principles behind the words are eternal and will manifest again. When a new heaven and new earth are created, then another teacher will proclaim such words as, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

The fact that we lose all our memories of experiences when we incarnate in a new life is representative of what happens on a vaster scale in the universe.

He ends with this interesting question: “Does something that has happened ever stop being in the past?”

This is probably the best challenge to this principle I have seen. The reason behind the beginning and ending principle is form itself. At the end of the universe when there is no more form, time and space there will be only the eternal now with no past or future as we understand them. All things that have form have a beginning and end for sooner or later all form changes shape or loses its shape and is reduced back to its eternal idea.

There is no argument that every event and experience have a beginning and end. If you ride a Ferris wheel there is a beginning and end to that ride. There is also a beginning and end to the Ferris wheel that created the ride. But it seems that there was a beginning to the experience or even of the ride itself, that event will continue to exist as a memory in time and space.

To determine whether an experience in time and space has no end as a memory of an event in the past one must ask if it is created and sustained by form. The answer is yes. All events in the past can only be recalled by reconstructing form through the power of mind, pictures or symbols. All such forms begin and end. Time itself has a beginning and ending with the creation and dissolution of the universe. What is eternal about an experience is the point in time and space in which it occurred. All points in time and space originate in the formless eternal worlds. What happens at these points has a beginning and end and after the time and space of this universe comes to an end even reconstructing the memory will have an end.

The question to ask at this point is an old one. If an event occurred in time and that time has passed away and there is no one to recall the event, does the event still exist in the past?

This recalls the logic in the Course in Miracles and other teachings that I find somewhat sophomoric. It goes something like this: This world is created by illusion. Therefore, the experiences we think we have had did not happen. If they did not happen then they are not eternal.

I look at it like this: This world is created on illusionary principles, but the power that created it is real and the experiences we have are real. The principle of experience itself never had a beginning and will not have an end and thus the effect of all experience does not have a beginning and end. The form of all experience has beginning and end but each experience is linked to all other experience making each point in time and space part of an eternal chain.

Time and space which is eternity as we know it had a beginning.

Question: “It is recorded that our Solar and Planetary Logos once evolved through the human kingdom. Are these two Great Beings considered to be individuals or are they something else, i.e., a group life that is beyond our/my present awareness?”

These are two individuals who are in charge of a great Hierarchy. Many there are who assist them and share their consciousness through the Oneness Principle, but each of these has a job and stewardship as individual entities according to their ability to serve. You could say then they live as individuals as well as a group mind.

Question: What is the eternal part of ourselves that evolves?

It is the monad endowed with intelligence and the power of decision. The monad is our originating point in this universe and beyond this point is the mystery of our timeless past.

Question: How is it that we can exist as individuals yet be a part of a higher entity?

The principle will work with us (ages from now) just as it works for the cells, atoms, and molecules in our bodies. They have achieved relative perfection and the only way for them to progress is through a greater life, such as us. The tiny lives in your body are providing a vehicle of consciousness for us and eventually become one with the greater lives of which they are a part. We will do the same thing and eventually see through the consciousness of Christ, the Planetary Logos, the planet itself and beyond.

Very few of us will become a planetary Logos in this universe but all who follow the highest they know will join with the higher consciousness and share a oneness with them and assist in the great work. Even though there will always be hierarchy we will have an equality beyond which we can presently understand. Which cells in your body are the hierarchical leaders? You know not for all share an equality.

Never fear shadows. They simply mean there’s a light shining somewhere nearby. Ruth E. Renkel

July 4, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

Principles of Discovery – Part 9

Principles of Discovery – Part 9
Applying Principles

Truth is in harmony with spiritual principles; therefore, we discover that which is true through the application of those principles.

What principle(s) can we apply to discover the truth of this great subject?

Principle One:

If a thing has a beginning it will have an end, but if there is no beginning there will be no end. The opposite is also true. If there is an end there was a beginning and if there will be no end there had to be no beginning.

This means that if there is a beginning to us as intelligent individual entities that there will be an end. If there is a beginning to eternal life then there will be an end. If there is a beginning to us being gods then there will be an end.

I submit that that which you are never had a beginning in time and shall never have an end. As a human entity in a human body, you are one of the reflections of God, or as the Aquarian Gospel tells it, “One of the thoughts of God.”

Principle Two:

A life whether it be an atom, a worm, a man or a planetary Spirit evolves to relative perfection within its sphere. When this relative perfection is reached its progression on an individual basis comes to an end, but it uses molecular principles (see the Molecular Relationship) to enter a path of higher evolution.

How can you apply these two principles in discovering the great mystery? If you were not once an animal or a plant what have you always been and will forever be? When you reach relative perfection how will you continue to Become?

One asks: Relative to what? If you reach relative perfection, based on your perspective today, you will probably see much ahead to learn and do.

I have written quite a bit already on this subject, but I will add one more thing. Where there is not an agreed upon measure for ultimate perfection what is called perfection is in the eye of the beholder.

On the other hand, there are many absolute perfections that can be agreed upon. For instance, an absolutely perfect circle has all points on its circumference exactly the same distance from the center. But in physical reality there is no such thing as a perfect circle. There is not a planet in the universe with an exactly circular orbit. No one has ever created a perfect circle. What is the best we can hope for? The closest we can come to absolute perfection is relative perfection. In other words, we can create relatively perfect circles.

Once relative perfection is reached in the world of form the intelligence behind its creation recognizes it and begins to duplicate this perfection. For instance, a proton is relatively perfect. These particles are not absolutely perfect because each proton has a very slight differentiation from all others. Because the intelligence behind the proton recognizes the relative perfection of this unit it has created these relatively perfect particles by the same principles everywhere in the universe.

Humanity does the same thing as God does. When we reach relative perfection in creation others copy this perfection to the best of their ability. Our better bicycles, for instance, are made about as close to maximum efficiency as possible. As manufacturers approach relative perfection others follow. We will never create the perfect bicycle, but we will eventually get so close to perfection that it would be a waste of time to attempt any more improvement.

This is what Supreme Intelligence has done with the proton. Perfection is so close that any more attention on improvement is not worth the effort. God’s efforts are now much better spent working on humans. We are far from relative perfection on the physical plane.

What we are looking for here is the explanation of the missing link, so to speak, in evolution. When there is progression from one kingdom to another there is a quantum leap. For instance, an atom to a plant, a plant to an animal, an animal to a human and human to a member of the God Kingdom.

Let me give you a logical reason why the progression is something far different than the mere evolution of an individual life.

In your body there are trillions of atoms to compose your one physical life. If each of these evolved into human form the universe would have to expand an unreasonable amount to accommodate all the new humans.

Instead, the greater life is created without the loss of the identity of the atom. As was written in the Molecular Relationship atoms create molecules, molecules create cells and cells create plants and so on the progression goes.

We have established the first major point we are looking for and that is this. A greater life is manifested when smaller lives unite with higher purpose.

Why does this mean you were not once a slug? Are you a greater life in relation to the lower kingdoms?

Some have said that we did not come from the lower kingdoms but are an eternal thought in the mind of God. If so, what caused you to manifest here for the first time and what principle will draw a higher life than human?

To elaborate some more I will quote from a previous post: “The lowest of the formless worlds is a world of essential ideas. Consider the song “Yesterday” by the Beatles. Even before the formation of the Beatles, the essence of the song existed beyond time and space as an idea in the mind of God. As an essential idea it had no form. Then Lennon and McCartney tuned into this formless idea and brought it down into time and space and clothed it with vibration, vinyl and sheet music.

If every piece of form representing this song in this world were destroyed the essential idea would still exist in the formless worlds and take form again somewhere, sometime.

An important question is, how the creation of a molecule of 24 will create a greater life, where that greater life will come from and how it will get here. Does this greater life have a beginning or an end? What is our relationship to it?

The greater being that will come alive will of course be the sum of all 24 individuals but will also be given more energy and light from higher levels so it will indeed be more than the sum of the 24.

The phrase that a greater life being created by the “sum of its parts” and then being greater than the sum of its parts is often taught in metaphysical circles, but I will submit that this is a misleading phrase.

As a side note, I have found something very interesting in my pursuit of truth and that is if you hear a common phrase that is purported to be true you will often find that there is illusion behind it if the meaning is examined in the light of the soul. “Go with the flow” is a popular example that we have discussed earlier.

Technically the greater life is not created by the sum of its parts for it never had a creation.

Let us look at the simple molecule of water again which is composed of oxygen and hydrogen. Let us take one of these elements. Suppose we have oxygen packaged in unites of ten each and we start adding them together. 10+10+10+10+10 = 50 for example. We can keep adding these packages (parts) of oxygen and what do we get? Answer: More oxygen. And how much oxygen do you get? Answer: The sum of its parts. Now suppose you add big numbers like billions and trillions of oxygen atoms. What do you get? The answer is the same: More oxygen gas. No matter how many parts you throw in the result is the same material, only the quantity increases.

Now let us add different type of parts. Let us add two atoms of hydrogen to one of oxygen and what do you get? Is it just the sum of the parts which is three atoms?

No.

Is it greater than the sum of its parts?

Not really because it is not the sum of anything for this new material, water, has properties not related to the sum of hydrogen and oxygen because it is so different from either of them. It was not created through simple addition as oxygen gas was, but through right combination, bonding, electrical exchange and other factors.

To understand this, we must accept the premise that the life of God flows through all things and even atoms and molecules are alive within their own sphere. Many seekers realize that life advances in stages and that the molecule is a greater life than the atom, a cell greater than the molecule, the plant greater than a cell and so on.

These greater lives are not manifested through a simple addition but the prerequisite is a unique combination of elements that will allow the life that has always been to express itself.

Even though the greater lives have always been they are not seeking to become what they have always been. If this were the case there would be no purpose in manifesting on the physical plane. Each life that manifests here does so in the hope of Becoming that which it has never been but without the loss of that which has forever been.

Question: What must be prepared for a greater life before it manifests and what is this process of the manifestation of a life called? This is the key word we are looking for.

“The man who chases two rabbits, catches neither.” — Confucius

July 3, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

 

Extremism and Critics

Extremism and Critics

Our critical friend disagrees with me on extremism and says that the true extremist stands in the middle.

It sounds like he is being contrary to be contrary again. Tell me this. How could anyone following the Middle Way see an extremist who cuts off an innocent victim’s head off with a dull knife while praising Allah as a person who is in the middle?

I attempt to stand in the middle and see these people, as well as snake handlers on the Christian side, as extremists. If you want to call them as standing in the middle you may be the first one on the planet to do so. I do not think that even these extremists see themselves as in the middle, though it is true that as the pendulum swings, people point to all points on it and make accusations of extremism.

Next he claims that everyone sees themselves as in the middle.

I think a lot of extremists see themselves as being in the extreme, but for a good cause, of course.

Take Barry Goldwater who said: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!

He was seen as an extremist by most Democrats and he happily admitted to it.

Before moving on I thought I would attempt to teach a principle that my critics would be wise to incorporate.

Principle: It is easy to destroy, but difficult to build.

This principle applies when dealing with the various teachings available.

Notice that my recent critic takes my words and tries to destroy their meaning rather than to look for the truth therein and build upon that.

Just imagine if he sat at the feet of Jesus and challenged him as he does me.

Jesus: Love your enemies.

Critic: This is nonsense. Why do you think you have enemies? Enemies and friends are two sides of the same coin. There are no enemies for all things are pure.

Jesus: Blessed are the pure in heart.

Critic: Nonsense again. We are all pure in heart. No one is impure.

Jesus: Deliver us from evil.

Critic: You are a false teacher Jesus. There is no evil except for what is in your mind.

Jesus: The father waits for the prodigal son to return.

Critic: Nonsense again. The prodigal son never left.

Jesus: The truth shall make you free.

Critic: What truth? You are only looking at one side and see half the truth. You need to listen to me to get the other half.

Jesus: Blessed are the merciful

Critic: We are all merciful and all blessed. There is no need to call for a blessing that has already been meted out.

Jesus: Go the extra mile.

Critic: There is no such thing as an extra mile. The infinite is found in one mile.

Jesus: Sin no more.

Critic: There is no sin, no evil and no good. They are all one.

Jesus: Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

Critic: Wrong message. God’s will is already done everywhere.

I think we get the point here. There is no master, no teacher or wise man who is capable of uttering words that cannot be attacked. It is the easiest thing in the world to take any words, even the words of the greatest of us all, and declare them to be wrong by the use of sophistic logic.

It is another matter still to look for the truth behind those words and add additional light.

Let me issue a call to the group to do the latter. Sure, if I make a blatant error point it out. Assaf does this quite successfully with my Hebrew while still seeing the good, the beautiful and the true. We find what we are looking for. Let us look for the true with more attention than the false so in the light we can see more light.

Let me give the group my philosophy on how I react if I see something I consider negative from another person.

No matter how dumb the statement I never call the person stupid, dumb, ignorant, boring etc. Neither do I call any person a derogatory name or use a swear word directed at them.

Instead, what I do is to isolate the statement or philosophy that may show some ignorance and comment and elaborate on that.

For instance, a very intelligent person may utter a dumb statement. If I criticize such a statement, I am only criticizing a non-entity, not the person himself. Such a dumb thought may count for less than one percent of his thinking process, the rest of which could be brilliant.

I think you can go over the millions of words I have written and do not think a reader can find one direct insult I have ever made to a reader. Instead, if I have a criticism, I will isolate his or her words and analyze them.

That said, let me again offer a piece of advice I have given many times to those who criticize me.

Please argue with what I do say; not with what I have not said.

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger. Franklin P. Jones

July 2, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

Simplicity and Initiation

Simplicity and Initiation

Question: How would a dark brother react to a disciple extending love to him or her?

The Dark Brother would see a true unselfish act of love as a stupid gesture and would not register the feeling of love expressed.

Then too, there is a segment of the population who do not let themselves feel spiritual love but feel the selfish aspect of love attraction is all there is.

While it is true that an act of love is registered as a similar feeling among all those who are willing to feel it, there are a number of variations of love energy released through the heart center as it unfolds. Therefore, those who send love, send it out in a variety of levels. Pure love energy is much more universally recognized in a receiving state than it is wielded in a sending state.

On another note, a reader brought up an interesting apparent paradox which is basically this:

[1] The true seer sees the simplicity behind all things.

[2] But evolution is causing the end of the various creations to become more complex.

There is a lot of illusion around the simplicity principle. Many religious people emphasize Christ’s statement that we must become like a little child and think that little children should be our teachers. Some teach we must shut down our minds and just follow authorities without thinking, as a child may do.

Jesus was emphasizing that we must be open-minded like children, not that we should blindly follow as a child, or cry every time we skin our knees.

Anyone capable of reasoning can see that there are many benefits to being an adult – that an adult can understand many things that a child cannot.

That said, it is true that evolution is causing creation to become more complex. Just look at our cells and the DNA. It is so complex that we have only recently mapped the human genome using the most sophisticated computers in the world. If it took all our intelligence just to map it, just imagine the complex thinking it took to create it from scratch. But when higher forms are created the complexity will be greater still.

Even though there is great complexity in our universe all forms can be reduced to simplicity. All is created from the great Trinity of positive, negative and the originating point. From the multiplicity of this and the interplay of countless pieces of intelligent creation we have the majesty of complex creation that boggles the mind.

The true seer looks at the complexity of all things and attempts to understand it. As he understands he seeks to reduce the complex to the simple by tracing it back to its source. As he does this, he begins to understand in simplicity no matter how interwoven is the complex. He sees the principles behind all things rather than all the details.

In all cases complex creation can be reduced to a simple duality such as complex programs being reduced to 0 and 1. The seer will look for the trail that leads from the complex to the simple so understanding can be complete.

I received some questioning on this statement: “Initiates are usually less disruptive than average in an environment like this group. Beginners are usually the difficult ones.”

Two contradictory statements cannot both be true. Either beginners are the most disruptive or the initiates are.

I submit that it is the beginners who are the most disruptive.

Look at Christ in the temple when he was 12. He was not disruptive, but interesting.

Then later when he was seen as disruptive, he was minding his own business. He didn’t enter the meetings of the Sanhedrin and try to force his views upon them. He taught and healed among the people where the authorities shouldn’t have cared less. But they did care because it was the authorities who were disruptive, not the Christ. The authorities went out of their way to attack the Christ–not the other way around, except that one time he chased the moneychangers out of the temple.

One of my critics accused me of suppressing real initiates by not allowing them to continue forever on their own line of discourse and objections.

First, let me clarify the purpose of this group. Simply put, it is this. It is to raise a beacon of light and in doing so attract or gather the lights.

This group is a classroom. A classroom is not a place conducive for students to initiate. It is a place to learn, to be inspired and in the process, some may initiate outside the classroom situation.

Let us look at initiates in history.

Jesus: Any attempt to initiate in a classroom for him? No.

The apostles? They did not initiate while they were students. They initiated when they became teachers in their own right.

Buddha: He learned under many teachers and never initiated a thing until he became a teacher himself.

Lincoln: Did he initiate anything of consequence while attending school? Not hardly.

Churchill: He initiated through his writings, speeches and his bold actions during and after the war.

What is there for a student to initiate while learning in a class? Very little. It is a time of preparation. Agreeing or disagreeing with the teacher has nothing to do with initiating. One has to create something to initiate. If one has not created something or assisted in it then nothing has been initiated.

Is everyone here just twiddling their thumbs then with no initiating going on?

No. For one thing if one is a good student, he has accomplished a lot right there. One must master receiving before he can give through initiating.

In addition, many here who are receiving on one hand and sending on the other and are working to initiate different things.

Larry initiated the archives as they are now, but he did this outside the classroom.

John Wayne Kline is always busy working on getting something going locally and internationally.

John Crane is working on a book.

Rick initiated the Keys group.

A Keys student who is in prison is initiating new teaching ideas there that the prison system may use nationwide.

Marilyn initiated the editing and storage of all the Keys writings and this task has been taken over by Chrissie.

Glenys started her own forum and has been successful in spreading the Ancient Wisdom.

Anni initiated translating my books into Danish and publishing them.

Dan and Adam are initiating a project to use computer programs to translate my works into other languages.

Susan, Sharón and Mindy volunteered to edit my writings.

Robert initiated his own podcast.

Perhaps the closest work directly related to this forum was Bryan initiating the daily quotes, which has been continued by Ruth.

There are other good members working at initiating projects but this group should present the general idea–that initiating is going on and the sign of it is that something is being created that benefits others.

Arguing with the teacher has nothing to do with initiating anything. Now if a student thinks the teacher is out to lunch and moves on and creates his own teaching that draws a significant audience and changes them for the better then he could lay claim to initiating something.

Yes, initiating is about change, but my critic made no positive change in this classroom, nor was one desired.

Plato was an initiate, but while a student of Socrates he did not try and introduce a whole new brand of doctrine or teaching method. He was extremely respectful and cooperative in his classes and began initiating only after Socrates was gone.

It’s not the hours you put in your work that counts, it’s the work you put in the hours. Sam Ewing

June 28, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

Principles of Discovery – Part 8

Principles of Discovery – Part 8

Quoting myself from the previous post:

“One of the key ingredients to effective person to person communication is that those attempting to so communicate use the same definition of words. This was the reason that I defined the word “channel” a while back so the group could use the word with unity of definition.

“Let us pick a popular word and demonstrate how even our fairly enlightened group will have different definitions of it.

“That word is LOVE.”

As happened last time, I was surprised by the quantity and diversity of thought expressed by the group – all of it good and valuable for contemplation.

If I had to express it briefly, I would say love is a magnetic pull that draws all life back to its source and in that process unites that life.

Now the interesting thing about love is this. When another person performs a true unselfish act of love in our direction a feeling of love is registered in our breasts. This feeling is the same for all of us.

Even though we all feel the same energy when love is registered no two of us seem to be able to explain what we felt in the same way.

Some say it is a state of mind. Others say it is a verb. Still others an emotional feeling, a creative force, the foundation of creation and even what God is.

So, we have a feeling that we all register and sense in a similar way yet we all define and express it differently. It is quite possible to take two people who have felt the same energy of love yet argue about what it is because their words they chose to communicate the word veil the actual truth of the experience that both have felt in the same way.

This is the problem of communicating from personality to personality. Two personalities can take exactly the same experience yet present it in such different ways that the two will soon be swearing that the other guy has no idea what love is.

Two personalities may have a similar view of God, yet because they call Him/She/It by different names they may see the other as an enemy of such God.

The problem with the personality is that even if two people experience or believe in essentially the same thing our filters cause us to see the other as one who is much different from ourselves.

The solution is soul-to-soul communication rather than personality-to-personality.

When there is soul-to-soul communication concerning love (or any other subject) why is there perfect communication even though the two may have different ways of explaining it?

How do we achieve this soul-to-soul communication? What are the obstacles in the path?

Few people are ready for true soul-to-soul communication. Such communion comes after many lifetimes of frustration due to the limitations of the personality or lower self. Then the time comes that the frustration and pain become so great that the pilgrim lifts his downward focused eyes upward in the initially shaky belief that there has to be something more fulfilling.

Many of those who read these words will have passed through various dark nights and will be ready for something higher.

For those who are seeking here are some helpful steps towards soul-to-soul communion.

[1] The first step is to desire higher communication. Many are comfortable in the world of personality communication, for sterile words without life hide meanings and distort the true thoughts behind them. This distortion produces a comfortable illusion behind which many hide until they can hide no more.

[2] The seeker must believe that soul-to-soul communication is possible. Without this belief his search will wither and die from lack of attention.

[3] Once the desire and belief in higher communion is recognized the seeker must actively seek to acquire and master it. Nothing of value is just dumped in our laps. Hard work and focus is as important here as in any other endeavor.

[4] Search for others who feel they have achieved soul-to-soul communication to a degree and learn from them.

[5] Seek communion with your own soul. Only when you have found your own soul can you then discover the soul of others.

[6] Understand the difference between soul-to-soul communication and personality communication. Soul communication looks beyond the black and white meanings of words to the thought and principles behind the words. “Reading between the lines” is the first step to higher communion.

[7] Feel true love toward those with whom you desire higher communion. Words given and received with love become alive and carry the thoughts of God within them.

[8] Believe in the natural goodness of others and see the Christ within all, especially those with whom you touch the soul.

[9] Hold no grievance toward any person.

[10] When the soul of another is touched make sure the experience is firmly rooted in your memory. Recalling this memory often will renew your faith and give you the stamina to continue on the path until another contact comes.

[11] Be aware of your own state of consciousness. When you slip away from the soul recognize what is happening and refocus. Keep your mind steady in the light.

[12] Seek to bring the communion of the soul with those who have it not. By giving that which you have received you will call forth others higher than yourself who will lift you to higher ground.

A person who trusts no one can’t be trusted. Jerome Blattner

June 28, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

Principles of Discovery – Part 7

Principles of Discovery – Part 7
Effective Communication

The Question: How does giving and receiving effective communication aid in discovering the truth?

At least part of this answer is pretty obvious. Without communication of some type the word “truth” would have no meaning to us humans. A truth has to be given and received through communication before it can be registered as such by our consciousness. Even though 2+2=4 whether you are conscious of it or not, this truth will be as though it does not exist to your universe until the knowledge of it is communicated to you.

A tree does fall in a forest even though no one sees or hears it, but until this information is communicated to your consciousness, it has not fallen for you.

There are several levels of communication in our search for discovery.

[1] Communication through perception of the outside world.

[2] Person-to-person communication.

[3] Communication through the soul.

If each of us could just have accurate communication on these three levels we would rarely disagree. We could all see the truth together and have a wonderful union.

So why is this not the case? Why do so many of us disagree on even simple things?

The Course in Miracles gives a good reason for this. It tells us that we “see only the past.”

Thus, when two of us look upon the outside world with the same instruments of perception we see two different realities because the present is filtered through the memory of the past.

Let us use a football game as an example. On one side we have a cheering section for team A and on the other we have one for team B.

Both groups of fans are perceiving the same game, but the filters of the past cause entirely different perceptions.

If the referee calls a penalty for team A, team B fans will cheer him while team A fans may boo him off the field.

Both groups have the same perception, but different vision because of seeing the past blended in with the present.

Now let us suppose that all memory of all fans present was taken from them concerning the two teams

Let us suppose the referee once again gives a penalty to team A. Now what will their reaction be?

I think we can all visualize here that, by taking away the vision of the past blended with the present, that suddenly the two sides would see the penalty very close to the way it really was. In other words, if two people keep their consciousness in the present (as a little child) and refuse to let the past distort their vision they will see as one. They will both see the truth as it is happening now.

Even though an eyewitness has the greatest possible credibility in court, studies have shown that they are much less reliable than the juries believe them to be.

Why?

Because their vision of the event is clouded by their memory of the past there is distortion, but there is one more reason: Faulty memory.

Our vision of the present is distorted by mingling it with the past, and the present is further distorted by imperfect memory bringing a distorted past forward as a cloudy filter, making it difficult to see the present truth.

Another thing that distorts the vision of the past is emotion. Even if you have a good memory, a very positive or negative feeling associated with a past perception can fog the vision for the present. For instance, you may have met the quarterback of Team A and found him very charming and even gave you an autograph. Then later you bumped into the quarterback of Team B and he barked at you to watch where you are going.

Even though you remember everything accurately you bring the feeling from the past into the present and decide you want Team A to win because the quarterback was a nice guy. Maybe Team B has more nice guys than team A, but you don’t care. The first quarterback planted a positive emotion in you and this greatly influences your present vision. The referee calls a fair penalty against Team A and you shout him down and call him a blind idiot.

Now the question is: How can we use this knowledge to increase the accuracy of our perceptions thus increasing our ability to perceive truth?

Quite simple. The first thing to always keep in our consciousness is the realization that the past does distort the present. Therefore, use memories of the past very sparingly as you perceive the present and when they are used make sure you only use items that are remembered correctly. Test your memory now and then and get an idea of how accurate it is so when you do filter through memory you will take into account a margin of error.

Also test your feelings and recognize the influence they have on you. When the referee makes a call you do not like, detach yourself from your feelings for a moment and ask yourself if the call was really fair. Do not allow yourself to see the call through your feelings. Instead, use pure present perception and accept what your perception gives you, even if it hurts.

Sports fans should be pleased here that even a game, or should we say, especially a game, can be a great exercise in the correct registration of reality.

There are two main communications left that reveal truth which are:

[1] Person-to-person communication and…

[2] Communication through the soul.

Does seeing the past also distort these two communications? How about faulty memory and past feelings? Do they also play a part?

We have always maintained that communication through the soul is accurate, but can even this be distorted by the past, feelings and faulty memory?

Now, let us go to the second category: Person-to-person communication.

If a teacher has a truth to reveal, but finds that he is unable to communicate it in such a way that his vision is perceived correctly then the truth stays with the teacher and nothing is given out. Perhaps the student through misunderstanding will decide the teacher is out to lunch and shuts off any reception that he previously had–all this because of lack of effective person-to-person communication.

Listen to any two friends have an argument. Often they are both making good points, but just don’t understand what the other is trying to say. If they could only understand, perhaps they would realize that they do not disagree after all.

It is interesting that many of the arguments that have happened in this group have occurred because of lack of understanding of another’s point of view. I’d say that over half the time I spend in handling confrontations is merely spent in clarifying something that I have already said, but is misunderstood by someone out there.

One of the key ingredients to effective person-to-person communication is that those attempting to so communicate use the same definition of words. This was the reason that I defined the word “channel” a while back so the group could use the word with unity of definition.

Let us pick a popular word and demonstrate how even our fairly enlightened group will have different definitions of it.

That word is LOVE.

The assignment for today: Give your definition of Love in 100 words or less.

“Destiny is no matter of chance. It is a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved.” William Jennings Bryan (1860 – 1925)

June 27, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

 

Final Logic

 

Final Logic

I must have written around a hundred thousand words on duality. There have been times that the group has been distracted for months talking about it and it was very frustrating to members to endure the same arguments over and over. I tried to respond with different insights, stories and parables to keep the dialog interesting. I covered it thoroughly so I would not have to do so again.

The “two sides of the same coin” argument was sent to me many times as if it were proof that what I was saying was incorrect when it had little or nothing to do with what I was saying. Even if we look at duality in this manner heads is still not tails. They are two different aspects of the trinity of reality.

Now we have entered a discussion with no end on predeterminism or predestination.

A lot of what has been argued about is based on semantics rather than principles. To most people two apples is a definite finite number of apples, but anyone can use a play on words to argue otherwise just as one can argue there is green cheese on the moon. It is wearisome to argue on a play on words rather than dealing with principles.

After some contemplation I have come up with logical proof that predestination is not correct and all is not happening at once in this reality.

Here it is:

[1] Time is caused by motion of form.

[2] Without motion there would be no time, space or matter for even the tiniest atom is created by waves in motion. Without motion all we see around us would cease to exist.

[3] All motion takes us toward a future point in time.

[4] If the future point in time is really in the present then there could be no motion for there would be nothing for motion to take us to.

[5] Again, if there is no motion, there is no time.

[6] If there is no motion and no time there is no form, no past, no present (as we know it) and no future.

[7] Therefore, because we do experience motion we have to be moving toward a future that is not yet formed.

[8] If the future is not yet formed then predicting it with exactness would require a knowledge of all existing causes in play.

[9] Even though this is theoretically possible another element comes into play that cannot be entered into any calculation. This element is intelligent decision.

[10] Because a decision can be made that runs contrary to all calculations, all data and all expectation, the exact future cannot be known in the present.

Our objecting reader seems to think that all decisions are predictable because “Nothing runs contrary to cause and effect.”

Okay. Someone throws a coin in the air and I am to call heads or tails. What causes and effects would you plug into God or your supercomputer to predict whether I will call heads or tails?

Let’s repeat this 1000 times. What causes and effects would you use to predict my call 1000 times without fail?

To this the reader still thinks cause and effect can predict such a thing in advance.

Okay then, how will you use this knowledge of cause and effect to consistently predict whether I will call heads or tails?

To this he gives the reasoning that each flip of the coin has a cause and is predictable in advance.

To this I would ask how this understanding (which we all have) can lead one to successfully predict whether the coin will land on heads or tails? What causes and effects would you plug into your super computer or universal mind to know a day in advance that you would be flipping a coin and what call you would make?

The reader then keeps falling back on the fact that there is a cause behind all things including flipping a coin. He seems to think I am going contrary to universal law

No one is talking about breaking any universal law. Just tell us how one could use this law to predict whether I will choose heads or tails.

You cannot because it cannot be done because one of the universal laws is the uncertainty principle. Science has elaborated on this but it extends to other things such as decision making.

He tells us that a dog can be taught to roll over on command and then we can predict when he will roll over.

But this is not an example of decision. This is an example of programming. It’s like your heart is programmed to beat and has nothing to do with your conscious decisions.

Animals do make some decisions on an elementary level, but to see this you have to put them in a situation where their instincts or programming does not take charge of their actions. If you put two paths before an animal and the choice is not related to his instincts, you will then see an elementary unpredictable decision made.

Many apparent choices humans make are not decisions but just people following a program. If a kid is indoctrinated in a certain religion and  acquiesces decision and does what he is told, then no decision is involved. On the other hand, if he thinks about what he is doing and rebels then he is using his power of decision.

Perhaps the simplest decision is the choice between two things where no programming is involved, such as the choice of heads or tails.

He thinks programming causes decisions and this is not true. Programming can influence us, but not necessarily decide for us. We are not computers or robots. We are living unpredictable beings who can decide between two alternatives.

He then tells us that a higher intelligence can understand our decisions and predict our exact future.

If what he says is correct then a scientist should be able to put a rat in a maze he has not seen before and predict each turn he will make. He cannot. If we cannot predict what a rat will do what makes you think that anything higher could predict all the decisions we would make? Why would It even want to? Would you want to know everything every rat decides to do?

Then he tells me I am breaking universal law thinking I am above cause and effect.

Where do you keep getting this nonsensical accusation that I think I am above universal law? I think no such thing. I keep telling you this and you seem to get amnesia or something about what I have told you.

He says I think that I am unpredictable to those more evolved.

Use the law of correspondences. Those lesser evolved than us are not 100 percent predictable to us, even so we are not fully predictable to those above us. DK said that Christ and the Masters of Wisdom could not predict all human decisions.

I am still waiting for an answer to this question:

Someone throws a coin in the air and I am to call heads or tails. What causes and effects would you plug into God or your supercomputer to predict whether I will call heads or tails during the 1000 flips?

The reader has danced around this, but given no answer. If he has no answer then he should consider that the future may not be completely determined.

Even with the best of maps and instruments, we can never fully chart our journeys. Gail Pool

June 18, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

 

The Kybalion and More

The Kybalion and More

This argument on predestination is getting about as futile as arguing that the moon being made of green cheese. This is a doctrine popular during the dark ages and partially responsible for keeping the people in their darkness. Many felt it was fruitless to use free will to change anything, as everything was already determined.

Next this reader tells me that my teachings on infinity are not in harmony with the Kybalion

I took a look at the Kybalion this evening which can be found at this website:

It is interesting that the Kybalion was supposed to be written by Hermes and some think he was Hermes.

I read some of the Kybalion and some commentary this evening and it says quite a few things in alignment with my teachings. Ironically, it says some things that run contrary to what some here have been teaching.

The text I read says:

“We do not wish to enter into a consideration of Free Will, or Determinism, in this work, for various reasons. Among the many reasons, is the principal one that neither side of the controversy is entirely right–in fact, both sides are partially right, according to the Hermetic Teachings.”

This is in harmony with what I have taught, that both extremes of this teaching are incorrect. Our predestination friend teaches the extreme that all, every detail, has been previously decided. The Kybalion says that this idea is only “partially right.” The other extreme, that nothing is determined or predictable, is also only “partially right.”

I agree with the Kybalion 100 percent on this.

This is also supported in this statement:

“And yet, do not make the mistake of supposing that Man is but a blind automaton–far from that. The Hermetic Teachings are that Man may use Law to overcome laws, and that the higher will always prevail against the lower, until at last he has reached the stage in which he seeks refuge in the LAW itself, and laughs the phenomenal laws to scorn. Are you able to grasp the inner meaning of this?”

As I started reading I saw a major contraction within the teachings of the Kybalion itself. It says this:

THE ALL is SPIRIT which in itself is UNKNOWABLE and UNDEFINABLE…

It thus says that the ALL is undefinable and then proceeds spending a good portion of the book defining it. It says it is unknowable and proceeds to explain it so we can know what it is.

If God or “the All” were truly unknowable and undefinable then it would be silly to define it as “infinite” as does the Kybalion. If it were truly undefinable and unknowable there is no way anyone could be consistent and define it as infinite or all knowing. All one could say is that he doesn’t know what the dickens it is, how big it is, how smart it is or any of its characteristics.

On the positive side I thought this statement from the Kybalion was good and in harmony with my teachings about God:

“Following the Principle of Correspondence, we are justified in considering that THE ALL creates the Universe MENTALLY, in a manner akin to the process whereby Man creates Mental Images. And, here is where the report of Reason tallies precisely with the report of the Illumined, as shown by their teachings and writings. Such are the teachings of the Wise Men. Such was the Teaching of Hermes. THE ALL can create in no other way except mentally, without either using material (and there is none to use), or else reproducing itself (which is also impossible). There is no escape from this conclusion of the Reason, which, as we have said, agrees with the highest teachings of the Illumined. Just as you, student, may create a Universe of your own in your mentality, so does THE ALL create Universes in its own Mentality.”

The writer uses the term “mentally” for want of a better word. I use the foundation word of Purpose and the Trinity of Purpose/Decision/Intelligence and Purpose/Light/love as it manifests in creation.

It says: “THE ALL can create in no other way except mentally, without either using material (and there is none to use).

This is in harmony with my teachings that matter has no solid material but is only Purpose in vibration. I have also said that man’s imagination is a reflection of God’s imagination and we both use this principle to create. The main difference is that ‘we cannot out imagine God’ and thus what is unlimited with God appears infinite to the human point of view.”

It says: “Just as you, student, may create a Universe of your own in your mentality, so does THE ALL create Universes in its own Mentality.”

I can see why a reader thought I may have taken a few things from this book as this is a principle I endorse.

My critic says this: “Just like hot and cold is part of the same thing. With different degrees in between the two. There is no place where hot and cold starts or stops. There is no place where finite starts, and infinite stops.”

Actually, cold starts at minus 459 degrees Fahrenheit, and hot cannot exceed the temperature where particles vibrate faster than light. There is a beginning, end and middle to all things in the world of form including hot and cold.

Our friend continues with a number of objections to my teachings, some the result of misunderstanding. Here are some of my clarifications:

Objection: You believe God makes mistakes.

To deny there is such a thing as a mistake is to deny the reality in which we live. Would you call DaVinci ignorant because he made mistakes before he finished the Mona Lisa? Can you find a perfect world among the billions of stars?

Objection: You think God creates without knowing what will happen

God knows the end which he has imagined but does not know all the details in between, nor would any intelligent being want to know. Why would Leonardo want to know how many times he would have to relieve himself in the process of painting the Mona Lisa? Why would God want to know about all the times you scratched your armpit as you are assisting in manifesting a creation? It’s silly when you think about it.

Objection: No hinderance is possible with God.

But the Kybalion says God is unknowable, so how can you claim to know this and accept the book?

God’s will always manifest, but it works its way through many hindrances. Without such hindrances creation would be no fun and God would not even participate. Would you play Monopoly if you got the roll of the dice you wanted each time? No, you would not. Neither would God.

As God jumps into the game of creation and life through His reflections (us) He has to figure things out through us to manifest his will. It’s not that we are made the way we are on purpose. We have always been and are not created because (as the Kybalion says) THE ALL is in ALL. As creation manifests, we all have to plow with the horses we have until mastery is attained. This is verified by reality.

Objection: You think that God is without order .

I have never said God is without order. What makes things unpredictable is not chaos for chaos is fairly predictable. What makes things unpredictable is intelligence making decisions. Intelligence produces order, not chaos, and the decisions of one who is intelligent are the most difficult things to predict.

Example: Before World War II DK tells us that Christ and his Hierarchy thought they had the path of evolution into the new age figured out. Then an evil genius named Hitler made decisions that were not foreseen and created situations that caused the Hierarchy to reformulate many of their plans. We will still enter the new age as planned, but the path is different than anticipated.

Objection: You do not acknowledge that good and evil are two sides of the one polarity.

There is no such thing as two sides of a duality being the same polarity. By definition a polarity can only exist when the pull is to one side of the duality.

Dualities exist in our world, but are an illusion originating from a place where there are no polarities, except in t

Objection: There can be no problems where God’s will rules.

I would like to know where you get the idea that there can be no problems, no errors and no mistakes in life. This is not taught in the Kybalion or by any teacher of significance I can think of.

Yes, God’s will rules, but part of His will is to have a game with lots of pitfalls so he can enjoy the win in the end.

Objection: Scripture says that the son of man goes as it is written of him. That is another way of explaining predestination if you hadn’t noticed.

I do not notice. This has absolutely nothing to do with determinism as you teach it. There is no argument that some things can be predicted. The argument (perhaps you have not noticed) is whether everything down to the smallest detail can be predicted. In other words, it can be predicted that there will be a crime mentioned in tomorrow’s newspaper, but no one can email me the exact text of the details or tomorrow’s newspaper.

Objection: Your belief in a world beyond time and space is not logical

This is actually explained quite well in the Kybalion. It tells us that all things in form are created from the imagination of the mind of God. This mind does not exist in time and space, but creates it and incarnates within it.

From the Kybalion: “The Teacher instructs the student to form a Mental Image of something, a person, an idea, something having a mental form, the favorite example being that of the author or dramatist forming an idea of his characters; or a painter or sculptor forming an image of an ideal that he wishes to express by his art. In each case, the student will find that while the image has its existence, and being, solely within his own mind, yet he, the student, author, dramatist, painter, or sculptor, is, in a sense, immanent in; remaining within; or abiding within, the mental image also. In other words, the entire virtue, life, spirit, of reality in the mental image is derived from the ‘immanent mind” of the thinker. Consider this for a moment, until the idea is grasped.

“To take a modern example, let us say that Othello, Iago, Hamlet, Lear, Richard III, existed merely in the mind of Shakespeare, at the time of their conception or creation. And yet, Shakespeare also existed within each of these characters, giving them their vitality, spirit, and action.”

Objection: How could a formless world even exist? If there is no form there is nothing, right?

Not quite. The lowest of the formless worlds is a world of essential ideas. Consider the song “Yesterday” by the Beatles. Even before the formation of the Beatles, the essence of the song existed beyond time and space as an idea in the mind of God. As an essential idea it had no form. Then Lennon and McCartney tuned into this formless idea and brought it down into time and space and clothed it with vibration, vinyl and sheet music.

If every piece of form representing this song in this world were destroyed the essential idea would still exist in the formless worlds and take form again somewhere, sometime.

Look at your computer, a coffee cup, your watch… These are all ideas clothed in form. The idea behind each form (including your body) is eternal and exists in the higher worlds and is experienced by pure life energy, which resides there.

To tap into the formless worlds, we must go beyond consciousness in time and space and identify with essential life energy which is one with all other lives in a world of ideas. Actually, living there beyond time and space is beyond regular human consciousness. The best we can do is tap into these higher worlds and bring some inspired ideas from on high down to human consciousness.

I know God will not give me anything I can’t handle. I just wish that He didn’t trust me so much. Mother Teresa (1910 – 1997)

June 17, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE

 

Principles of Discovery – Part 6

Principles of Discovery – Part 6
The Process of Elimination

Another instrument in the discovery of truth is the Process of Elimination. How do you suppose this principle works? Have you used it yourself to discover truth? Many of us have used this in the game “Twenty Questions.”

Whatever the case this is an important principle of discovery.

Remember the test I gave the group some time ago to guess which one digit number I had in my mind? Since no one was psychic enough to get it they had to use the process of elimination. The group assumed that there were ten one-digit numbers which are 0123456789. After half of them were eliminated, the group ceased using the guessed numbers as possibilities. They were removed through the process of elimination.

Finally, there were two numbers left and then one. Surely the number left was it, but I still said no. None of the ten guessed was what I had written down. The group went into deep meditation (a guess). Since there are ten one-digit numbers and they had guessed them all and none of them was the number then the truth may not have been as obvious as it seemed. Could there be more than ten one-digit numbers, someone finally mused?

Finally, someone used the process of elimination correctly and eliminated all positive numbers from the equation and realized that the answer could be a negative number. After the ten standard digits were eliminated, the group realized that there were nine negative digits that no one had considered yet. In other words, the process of elimination made them consider a possibility that otherwise would have never been looked at.

Finally, when the group realized they were on the right track it was only a short time through the use of the process of elimination that the correct digit was picked. As I remember, it was minus 2.

The interesting thing is that we have a number of psychics in this group, but as it turned out the process of elimination proved more reliable than ESP.

The truly accurate psychic is indeed a rare thing, but if we can, through the use of mind, logically eliminate certain items as false this leads us, with great accuracy, toward the truth. Any time the seeker has a chance to eliminate a piece of data as false he must rule it out no matter how much it goes against his belief system.

Any scientists who honestly uses the process of elimination must admit that there is a God, or at the least a higher intelligence than man. All he has to do is study the human cell and ask: Could this have been created with no guiding intelligence? Anyone using the process of elimination must admit that a creation a million times more complicated than the Mac I am staring at had to be created by some guiding hand or Purpose.

The atheist scientist illustrates one of the problems with this principle of truth. An item that must be eliminated from the equation can stare many of us in the face, yet we refuse to eliminate it.

If the prophet Rambalana takes his believers to a mountain top time after time to be picked up by Zor and his spaceship and nothing happens, the time should come that the believer would eliminate Zor and Rambalana from the equation of truth.

The sad fact is that even when that which is obviously false appears, the believer continues to believe instead of eliminate.

Take the Jehovah’s Witnesses for instance. One of the founders named Charles T. Russel predicted the return of Christ in the late 1800’s. When he didn’t show up he moved the date ahead. When he didn’t show up again the followers still did not use the process of elimination. Russel took advantage of that belief and moved the date ahead again to 1914.

Well, 1914 came and went but still no Jesus appeared in the clouds. Russel himself refused to eliminate this final date as being wrong and concluded that Jesus did come in 1914, but he just came invisibly and no one saw him. Thus, if I understand the current Jehovah’s Witness doctrine, they still to this day have not eliminated 1914 as the arrival date and accept this as the year of the coming of the Lord.

I personally grew up in an alcoholic family and pretty much fended for myself and my little sister as a kid. I eliminated my parent’s lifestyle as a desirable way of life and became active in the Mormon Church as a teenager. Then, using this same process of elimination, years later I eliminated certain teachings within the church, such as strong infallible authority, as being anti-spiritual and moved on to greater vistas of learning.

“All we can do is to train aspirants in recognized group requirements. We must also point out to them the dangers of mental pride, detail to them their personality limitations and the difficulties of true spiritual leadership, and then plead with them to mind their own business where each other is concerned and ask them to serve the human race; this of course means, incidentally, serving the Hierarchy and thus demonstrate their ability to work within an Ashram. Disciples-in the earlier stages-are apt to be didactic; they like to express in words their profound understanding of occult truth and thereby, in reality, establish their superiority over non-esoteric students, and in so doing (again incidentally) antagonise those they otherwise could help. They like to show their unique familiarity with hierarchical principles but, as they are not yet living those principles, they hinder more than they can help; at the same time, through self-discovery, they learn much thereby. They believe that in expressing their knowledge of petty and unimportant details anent the lives and methods of the Masters, a high point of spiritual understanding and development is thereby indicated. This is not by any means the case. In the last analysis, it indicates a superficial sense of false values, and seventy per cent of their information is wrong and of no importance.” DK – Discipleship in the New Age, Vol 2 Pages 108-109

June 16, 2006

Copyright by J J Dewey

Index for Original Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE

Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE

Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE