Keys Writings 2014, Part 21

This entry is part 25 of 33 in the series 2014

Sept 12, 2014

Vegetarian Diet

Anonymous to Jim:

Perhaps you are out of place in this forum also. JJ has stated that he too is a vegetarian — as set forth by Alice Bailey.


First, all are welcome here whether they agree with us or not as long as they have something positive to contribute and are civil. Jim seems to be a very interesting guy and look forward to hearing more from him.

Secondly, I am not presently a vegetarian, though I have been on a raw foods vegetarian diet part of my life. I have had enough experience with both diets to understand the advantages of each. I find no benefit from the vegetarian diet as far as enlightenment or receiving spiritual knowledge goes. The same goes with spiritual experiences. I have received my greatest spiritual experiences while on a meat eating diet.

Some of the advantages of the vegetarian diet are:

(1) It is good for the inner work if you want to astral travel or do heavy meditation.

(2) It lessens the pull of material forces, but if you are a focused meat eater you can just ignore that pull.

(3) If done right with the inclusion of lots of raw foods it is good for your health. If one eats a lot of dead vegetarian foods then it may be less healthy than eating lots of meat.

The fact that Hitler was a vegetarian and non drinker while FDR and Churchill were big meat eaters and drinkers illustrates the truth of the statement of Jesus that it is “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.” Matt 15:11


Sept 14, 2014

To Veg or not to Veg

Anonymous Quotes from Esoteric Psychology, Vol 1, Page 241 as follows:

One point of interest might here be noted. It is known esoterically that the vegetable kingdom is the transmitter and the transformer of the vital pranic fluid to the other forms of life on our planet. That is its divine and unique function. This pranic fluid, in its form of the astral light, is the reflector of the divine akasha. The second plane therefore reflects itself in the astral plane. Those who seek to read the akashic records, or who endeavour to work upon the astral plane with impunity, and there to study the reflection of events in the astral light correctly, have perforce and without exception to be strict vegetarians. It is this ancient Atlantean lore which lies behind the vegetarian’s insistence upon the necessity for a vegetarian diet, and which gives force and truth to this injunction. It is the failure to conform to this wise rule which has brought about the misinterprertions of the astral and akashic records by many of the psychics of the present time, and has given rise to the wild and incorrect reading of past lives. Only those who have been for ten years strict vegetarians can work thus in what might be called the “record aspect of the astral light”. When they add to their purified astral and physical bodies the light of reason and illumination of the focussed mind (which is very rarely found), then they become accurate interpreters of astral phenomena. Their link with the vegetable kingdom is then very close and unbreakable, and that link or binding chain will lead them through the door to the scene of their investigations.


This statement from DK agrees with my last post where I spoke of the advantages of the vegetarian diet, one of which is:

It is good for the inner work if you want to astral travel or do heavy meditation.

If one wants to read the Akashic records accurately or do a lot of the inner work while in the flesh it is a big help to go on a vegetarian diet. Since this is not the course I am pursuing then I have not found this necessary. I have gone on fasts and raw foods diets in the past more for health than spiritual purposes. My greatest gift is to tap into the intuitive plane wherein the understanding of principles lie and diet has very little effect on that ability, as long as I maintain my health.

I have little interest in my own development in this life, for my purpose is to bring down knowledge and will that will aid in the transformation of human consciousnesses so we can take a step in the direction that will take us to manifesting the will of God on earth as it is in heaven.

It may be helpful to give the rest of the quote. DK continues:

But unless the goal of a vegetarian diet is this field of service, the arguments for its following and for that form of diet are usually futile and of no real moment. From the standpoint of the eternal verities, what a man eats or wears are seen in a connotation very different to that of the one-pointed fanatic. Let me again reiterate that this whole problem of the taking of life (whether in the vegetable or the animal kingdom) is a far bigger one than we know, and should be approached from an angle different (not only in degree but in kind) to that of the taking of life in the human family. The three aspects of divinity meet in man, and with the destiny of a divine son of God no one must interfere. Where the two aspects of divinity are concerned, as in the subhuman kingdoms, the attitude can be otherwise, and the emerging truth is different to that which the little minds believe.

The vegetarian diet is very helpful for the inner work, but can be a distraction for the outer. One of the main lessons my soul guided me to learn concerned dealing with the outer world and I found that being on a vegetarian diet as I struggled with this was not helpful at all. The more refined the diet I was on the more I wanted to retreat into the inner and ignore the outer, but alas that is not in harmony with my mission so I eat meat and drink some wine to keep me grounded and focused where I need to be at present. That of course could change if the need requited it.

I do not think many vegetarians realize the negative effect that would be produced within the animal kingdom if we all turned into vegetarians tomorrow. Most of the cattle, chickens, lamb, pigs, etc., would lose their source of sustenance and would suffer enormous depravation and death. Some species would be in danger of extinction.

Some of the large farms these days do abuse farm animals and I try and avoid buying from these.

Cows, chickens, pigs, and other farm animals raised for food on small farms often have a close relationship with humans and have their evolution enhanced. Farmers often talk to these animals, name them and feel genuine affection toward them. In return these animals are stimulated and do acquire a sense of higher relationship toward their masters which wild animals never develop. These domestic animals are thus stimulated in their evolution toward the human kingdom just as teachers among us stimulate our human evolution toward the Kingdom of God. Our own evolution toward the Kingdom of God often carries with it much more sacrifice than that experienced by the domestic animals. Domestic animals, for instance, are often taken better care of than are those in the wild at the hands of nature.

Even though an animal may be sacrificed for food the farmer may incur more positive karma than negative if he treats it humanely and makes its stay here on earth a pleasant experience.

As time passes humanity will move toward a vegetarian diet but for sometime in the future there will be a percentage of meat eaters who will insure the preservation of domestic animals such as cattle, sheep pigs, chickens etc. The cruel conditions of the large farms will be turned around as humanity grows to respect the lives in the animal kingdom.



Shalom JJ:

What you are saying is that you and the people in this forum are satisfied to be as Pharisees — even to the degree of rejecting a disciple of the Christ when he is invited into this forum to speak to the membership.


You wish us peace and then insult us as being Pharisees. That is extremely incongruent. Even Jesus did not have a problem with people merely disagreeing with him and did not hang his head down feeling rejected.


What you and DK portray as a fanatic, I have been for countless lifetimes.


Obviously your vegetarian diet isn’t much help for you in seeing truth for I never portrayed vegetarians as fanatics. After all, some of the members here are vegetarians. Why would I insult them?


Moreover, I am married to a fellow fanatic who has herself achieved Buddhihood in her own past lives.


I haven’t seen any such evidence of the described achievement by you or your wife. Just you saying a thing is true doesn’t make it so. Most people with a little help can see their past lives and be guided to their higher self. That by itself does very little to increase any degree of attainment. Real attainment is gained through hard fought struggles in real life.


For us, it would be a sin to eat the flesh of dead animals.


For you it probably would be, but not for me.


Yet, like a true Pharisee, you began our relationship by condemning me when I was speaking the truth to the forum members.


Maybe you need to eat a little meat to stimulate your thinking as again you are wrong. I have never condemned you. If you think I have please supply the actual quote of my words. I have only disagreed with some of your teachings and that is a much different animal than condemnation. I disagree with my wife on some things but even her sensitive female does not see me as condemning her.


And while this is the objective (bodily purification) of the Nazirene Disciple forum, it is not the objective of the people in this, the Keysters forum.


Well, you are right there. I certainly do not lay down the law on bodily purification, but leave it up to the members as to what they want to do. I try to follow the example of Joseph Smith who said, “I teach correct principles and let people govern themselves.”

The purpose of this group is not to guarantee anyone’s salvation or to make sure they are on the right diet but to give out true principles which they can then interpret and act upon according to their free will.

There are many teachers out there who have written many treatises without shedding new light on any principle let alone give out new ones. Many here who seek the principles behind things find this to be an oasis of knowledge.


You are satisfied with reading the books and the wisdom of men, and being good church-type of people.


Yet again, your sense of truth is lacking as few here attend any church. If we are not interested in attending church or establishing one then we are hardly church-type.


Yet, in this forum, Jim was permitted to openly denigrate mystics such as myself who dwell under the Nazirene Vow.


And you were allowed to compare us to the Pharisees who crucified Christ. I’d say you are the champion denigrator so far and don’t have much right to complain.


If you had confessed to Stephen that you are satisfied with being a church-type authority who derives their wisdom from books and higher-level carnal thinking,


Stephen is not my priest. So… if I get my wisdom and teachings from books and you do not, then why is it that perhaps most of your teachings are found in books and many of mine are not? So, where then do my many teachings found in no book come from? And how can you say that your teachings are not from books when you just repeat teachings already found in books???


You not only portrayed yourself as the highest source of truth…


If diet helps with enlightenment then you need to change yours for you are absolutely wrong again. I have never portrayed myself this way.


but you portrayed the body of Nazirene Disciple forum members as being ignorant of the great truths which you espoused. In the same manner as the Pharisees who rejected and crucified the Christ.


There you go again with the insults, but getting more virulent.


Now we have the question: Are you going to go to Stephen and tell him that while your ideas of a high-level spiritual community was conceptional, the actual community can only be inaugurated by a higher-level group outside of the Keysters forum?


Again your sense of perception is askew. The Keys is a classroom and it was not organized to set up a community, but for the sharing of knowledge. If a community gets set up that is in harmony with higher will then I suspect that some members will join, but I do not see them being attracted to anything you might be in charge of as it would be too old school and restrictive for them.



I was guided here to help you and your forum achieve your higher spiritual goals.


And maybe you are seeing things backwards as you have in many statements you made about me. Maybe you were guided here to discover the error of your ways.

Maybe there are things you need to confess to Stephen.


Sept 15, 2014

Allegory and History

The Assignment:

Contemplate current events and tell us one or more truths revealed by them.


Adam was the only one enterprising enough to respond to this. He mentioned ISIS and the fact that evil triumphs when good men do nothing. He gave some good quotes from Winston Churchill. I’ll just repeat one I liked: “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile—hoping it will eat him last.”

One of the best allegories from true events of recent history is found in the ascent and descent of President Obama in the minds of the public. He was elected on the empty promise of hope and change. Most who voted for him did not know what the hope was based on or what change they could expect. It was like he was saying, “hope and change, you fill in the blanks as to what that hope and change may be.”

So, he was basically elected on a catch phrase with no substance behind it, except for that which was in the imagination of the people. This catch phrase delivered with polish carried so much weight that he became the first person to be awarded the Nobel Prize for doing nothing, except making promises.

This true story reminds me of the fable of The Emperor’s New Clothes by Hans Christian Andersen about two weavers who promise an emperor a new suit of clothes that is invisible to those unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent. When the emperor parades before his subjects in his new clothes the people are so captivated by his authority that none will admit that their leader is naked. This continues until a child yells out, “But he isn’t wearing anything at all!”

Obama’s promises were naked, but like the people in the story, if you were not unfit, stupid or incompetent then you were supposed to have seen that his words were really clothed with brilliance. Unfortunately, those who cried out that the promises had no clothes of substance were ignored until now when the nakedness is becoming obvious and many are realizing they were made naked promises.

Anonymous has been quoting Alice A. Bailey and Theosophy on diet with the implication that we should be following what they say.

According to what has been taught here over the years what is the true criteria that determines whether or not a disciple will follow a teaching?

If a person follows something merely because someone says he should what does that say about him?


Welcome to the group Rich.

Truth is spiritual whether it be religious, philosophical, scientific or political. We do not care here which division truth is in – we only care if a thing is true or the highest we know as far as truth is perceived.

Truth benefits all races and is inclusive.

If you disagree with what I sad about Obama that is fine. All views are welcome here as long as they do not take us too far off topic and are civil.

So, what spiritual path do you follow?

Sept 17, 2014



No one on KOK tries to force any one who wanders in to start gobbling Red Meat with the blood oozing out, or smacking on Pork Chops as their initiation requirement to fellowship and sharing ,…….( with out dogmatizing )! Or suddenly becoming a Alice Bailey DK Mormon New Ager as a requirement to fellowship among other Seekers who have not yet be able to arrive at the subjection secret Garden of Eden where Anonymous claims to project from. I also haven’t read any Ananthamas against ALL other paths as is usually done on all of Alan’s Forums that declare from Anonymous’s subjectional Dogmas and his “shepherding” of seekers.


You have excellently stated one of the core differences between our forum and Anonymous’s. Or for that matter, our forum and most anything out there with an ideological content.

Consider what caused Anonymous and his group to originally be offended. It looked like Stephens idea of cooperation wasn’t going to get off the ground, but I did see one item of doctrine that I thought would be good for group discussion. Anonymous teaches that the Bible writers’ presentation of history was not literally true, but altered (I’d say fabricated, but Anonymous does not like that word) in such a way to present hidden truth through allegory. So I posed the question to the group as to whether this altering of history would be justified in order to present higher truth, especially when most people (including Einstein and Newton) would take the history to be a literally true presentation.

Anonymous and his inner core were extremely offended by us examining this idea and even accused us of distortion and lying about him. Yet he never presented any evidence of distortion nor were able to point out any accusation of Anonymous being a liar. It is interesting that outside of an original mention of Anonymous presenting the teaching we were going to discuss the doctrine as it stands alone without further mention of him or his group.

Groups such as Anonymous’s do not want their doctrine examined on a mental reasonable basis. You can only have a friendly conversation with them if you start with the premise that you agree with basic doctrines.

When you, ImAHebrew and his brother came here Anonymous warned us that you do not agree with us100%. By his criteria, then I should have rejected you. But as long as a person is civil and not just mindlessly attacking we are open to a reasonable discussion of anything taught here. If we find a flaw in the principles of reason we are happy to correct and move on. If two cannot reach agreement then normally some things will be put on the shelf and we will move on.

Some of my strongest supporters here have strongly disagreed with me in he past and still do not see all things as I do, but we are still friends and I am happy to have them here.

I doubt if there is anyone in Anonymous’s circle who, in the past, spent several weeks in fierce disagreement with him on a core teaching. I would guess that such a person would be written off as belonging to outer darkness.

Anyway, Jim, ImAHebrew and others who may not agree on all things are welcome here. All we ask is that members feel there is something here for them, seek to contribute in as positive manner as possible and be relatively civil. All are free to question anything said here without fear of being shunned.


Sept 18, 2014

Adam and Dan are contemplating deep thoughts that deserve some additional comment.

Adam says:

I’m still getting some cross-over in terminology, which makes me go squint-eyed trying to figure out when the discussion is about the Multiverse consciousness and when it is the Universe consciousness.


When we talk about the one God we are generally referring to the One Great Life whose life permeates all there is in all universes. What is left unsaid is that human consciousness can only tune into that portion of God that flows through the ring-pass-not of the system in which he dwells. For all but a few high initiates humans are limited to tuning into the life of God as it manifests here on planet earth.

Right now, the consciousness of God is developing through human type lives throughout the physical universe. When you get to levels above human such as planets, suns and galaxies the evolution of he indwelling life is not very advanced and proceeds with a different reckoning of time..

Let us take the earth for example. It has an indwelling life which is an extension of God just as we are, but it has not evolved to a level on its own plane that a human has on his. And a human has not evolved as much on his plane as an atom has in its state of relative perfection.

The most advanced being on the earth is the Planetary Logos, or Ancient of Days. Because he tunes into all the life on earth he is sometimes confused with being the indwelling life of the earth, but that is not him. He is merely a very advanced human who works with and stimulates the indwelling life of the planet.

This same principle applies to the solar system as a whole. It is presided over by an advanced human Logos, but the indwelling life of the whole still has a long way to go.

Advanced human lives who serve as a logos only go so far up. The Logos who is The One About Who Naught Can Be Said is the highest known. There doesn’t appear to be any advanced human or group evolved enough to govern a galaxy, the universe or multiverse. That all will come many billions of years hence.

Meanwhile the life of God in an elementary form is evolving in the galaxy and beyond and when the galaxy reaches a certain point of evolution a very advanced human logos will join with it to create governing principles to stimulate higher evolution.


The question at this point is whether or not the Universes inside the Multiverse are sufficient “Atoms” for the Multiverse to manifest in physical consciousness following each “perfected” state of 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 OR must the Multiverse wait until each Universe finalizes its individual decision to become whatever it set out to become – in the case of our Universe – a relatively perfected 12.


As the Universe of Seven nears perfection, after many incarnations, then it will commune with other universes who are also nearing perfection. When relative perfection is reached they will unite together and create the Universe of Eight, where there will exist eight creative rays rather than seven, which will then greatly multiply the possibilities of creation.


“What I mean is, for example, did the ‘big bang’ happen on the universal or metaversal (or metametauniversal, etc) level?” Adam adds: [first?] chicken or chicken? or simul-chicken?


Wherever an extension of the life of God begins there is a correspondence to a big bang. For instance, at conception there is almost an explosion of cell creation, the doubling of which slows as the pregnancy evolves. Even so, a planet, a sun and a galaxy began with a seed around which gathers an explosion of growth that later levels off.

The reason the Big Bang for the Universe was so dramatic was because it happened in a different time reckoning. Billions of years of evolution occurred in less than a second.

Did the multiverse also start with a Big Bang? Actually, we are in the middle of its Big Bang as we speak.

For those who say I just read books and come up with this stuff I ask this question. Where are the books that talk about these things we are discussing or cover the knowledge given in the Grand Tour of my book Eternal Words?


Sept 19, 2014

Anonymous quotes a lot from the Gospel of Thomas and I assume he thinks it predates the gospels of the New Testament. Craig Evans has done a lot of investigation into its dating and concludes that Thomas was not only written after the gospels but uses them as source material in many instances. He dates Thomas to be around 180 AD and the Gospel of the Nazirenes to be around 150 AD.

Here is a link to the section of his book dealing with this.



The Laggards

Ruth mentioned that I didn’t answer her last questions so here goes:


JJ: “Human type life is fairly rare on physical planets but much more abundant on the spiritual doubles.”

Is this because the Laggards are sent to physical planets to pass harder tests and take harder initiations?


No. There are laggards in every sphere wherein there is life. Some always progress faster than others no matter what the surroundings are.

I didn’t quite understand the rest of her questions so I’ll just say a few things about laggards and hopefully the answer will be there.

The laggards are old souls who are quite adept in the ways of living. In a previous system they merely did not evolve into higher spiritual consciousness and thus had to incarnate in another round as regular humans to complete their evolution. Instead of us assisting and teaching them it is often the other way around and they often teach us since many of them have advanced minds. Einstein for example was a laggard. But as intelligent as he was he was not sure that life continues after death. He did believe a higher intelligence governed the universe, but did not believe in the God of any religion.

DK tells us that in this round 60% of humanity will advance to spiritual consciousness. Most of the laggards will advance to this group. The 40% will be the laggards that will finish their schooling on another planet.


Ra seems to think I was being super negative in presenting a fairly objective analysis of the date of the Gospel of Thomas.

What is it with you Allenites that whenever we discuss something in an objective manner, that you use or believe in, that you think it is negative and should not have been presented?

You guys can knock yourself out analyzing anything I teach. Why do you not want to look at your teachings and materials in the light of day? It might bring you some new knowledge.

If you read the whole of the material I linked you will see that the writer did a pretty good job of presenting both sides of the argument and if there is something posted with which you disagree, instead of complaining that is negative then give the evidence to the contrary. And even if the material is one-sided (as most is) where is the harm in presenting it if anyone is free to post the other side.

I think his most impressive argument for the late second century is, in his words, “the number of specific contacts between the Gospel of Thomas and Syrian Gospel traditions and other Syrian religious traditions” when the Syrian writings are dated to around 180 AD.

Whatever the case, the seeker should judge any writing, not by its date, but by the amount of light and truth contained within. But if it is important to establish them as the actual words of Jesus then the earlier the date the greater is the probability that they will be his words. Of course, the teachings could still be true no matter who wrote them.

Tell me one verse of the Gospel of Thomas that reveals a truth of which you were not aware until you read it there.


Sept 20, 2014

Deep Thoughts


So when a cosmic question is asked by a student, I wonder if you were hoping to present the material down the road, or if you only wished to hint at certain answers that are within your database, or grasp, or if you sometimes have to go to the “well” with some questions, to seek further information and clarification from within?


Sometimes I am asked questions that delve into future material. This happened a while back as I was giving a class here in Boise. Susie Wong asked me a question that could only be answered by partially explaining an unrevealed Key. After giving out information on it I decided to present it more fully at a Gathering.

Then, sometimes I am asked a question I have not even thought of myself. Sometimes such questions can be answered by good common sense and reason and other times I have to stretch my mind up to the intuitive plane.


You pointed out that as the human race develops and progresses that advanced Logos will stimulate and work with galaxies, universes, etc. The question is, as we evolve, develop, and progress, will you and I and all of mankind become (I do not use that word arbitrarily) the entities that you discussed, that will incarnate in worlds, solar systems, galaxies, universes etc? As the universe of 7 becomes perfected will highly evolved human entities still exist or will we be part of the development of other worlds, solar systems, galaxies, universes etc?


There are two types of entities that preside over the larger lives such as planets and solar system. The most advanced at his time are entities who have passed through the human system. These have been called Masters, Chohans, Logoi or Gods by many. They are not the one God, but share Its consciousness. There is always one that presides, but many others who assist and preside over their own spheres of labor.

The second type of entity is the life itself that incarnates into such a body. For Earth this is sometimes referred to as the “Spirit of the Earth” or more commonly, Mother Nature. The incarnating life of these greater bodies is not as evolved on its plane as we are on ours and lives by a different reckoning of time. It would take about 25,000 years to register one heartbeat of time of this planet. These entities are not advanced humans but composite lives that consist of all the lesser lives upon it, just as you are one human but have billions of cells in your body.

As humanity evolves and becomes as the Gods they form hierarchies that assist in governing and stimulating these greater bodies. We as humans do not individually evolve into a planet or star system but become one with others that create greater lives that cooperate with other lives in the universe that will eventually bring it into a sate of relative perfection.

The Ancient of Days presides over this earth and is the Planetary Logos. His consciousness is so high that he can tune into, not only all the lesser lives, but the Spirit of the Earth itself and take care of planetary needs as they occur in our reckoning of time. He is the bridge of consciousness between the two levels of time.


Ra, you keep criticizing me for associating Anonymous with the Gospel of Thomas. Where did I do this? I merely said I “assumed” he believed it was of early origin.

You say: “name an instance on this forum where I analyzed your teaching and down played it or said you were flat out wrong?”

I never accused you of anything of the sort so why search for such a thing.

You quote a number of verses fro The Gospel of Thomas but you didn’t answer my question which was, Tell me one verse of the Gospel of Thomas that reveals a truth of which you were not aware until you read it there.

You give quotes but do not explain what truth was revealed to you. Take this quote, for instance, “When you make the two into one, and when you make the inner like the outer and the outer like the inner, and the upper like the lower, and when you make male and female into a single one, so that the male will not be male nor the female be female, when you make eyes in place of an eye, a hand in place of a hand, a foot in place of a foot, an image in place of an image, then you will enter [the kingdom].”)

Now what in the world is that supposed to reveal? I’ve seen this quoted dozens of times by Anonymous but never once explained.


Copyright 2014 by J J Dewey

Easy Access to all the Writings

Register at Freeread Here

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

Check out JJ’s Political Blog HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Join JJ’s Study class HERE

Series NavigationKeys Writings 2014, Part 20Keys Writings 2014, Part 22

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *