A google search for Scientology/AMORC will turn up a thread from nine years ago, started by an atheist skeptic, and asking whether AMORC is just a cheaper/low-pressure version of Scientology.
I'm only a 1st degree initiate of CR+C and I've never been a Scientologist, although I've followed the ex-Scientologist movement from afar. So I'd like to give my own brief take on what I perceive to be the similarities and differences.
Similarities
Both groups posit certain ideas about the nature of the human being, the soul, immortality and paranormal experiences.
Differences
CR+C does not have a "fee per service" model. There are membership dues, as you would expect from any fraternal organization, country club, etc. These amount to US$25 quarterly or US$35 for a "plus one" companion membership for two people living at the same address. Payments can be made through PayPal for your security. Included at no additional cost are study materials mailed to you quarterly. Membership is reserved to people aged 18+ and no restrictions are placed on your religious beliefs or other associations, be they personal, professional or political.
The cost to do all twelve degrees of AMORC/CR+C initiations would run you less than US$1000. Compared to what I've heard about the total cost of getting to OT VIII in Scientology, that's a drop in the bucket. And that doesn't even begin to address the differences between Scientology's (alleged) child abuse, financial fraud and "disconnection" policy as compared to AMORC/CR+C which engage in none of those things.
In conclusion, while many people might say that both sets of teachings amount to spiritual nonsense, and that's fine, I can't help but think there's no moral or ethical similarity between Scientology and these two Rosicrucian Orders.
Wednesday, July 25, 2018
Atlantis through the eyes of Egypt
Continuing my faux archaeological exploration of Atlantis, here is a papyrus fragment from the Middle Kingdom which details a slightly different version of the myth.
The god of the sea is their father, and the divine bull is his son. When the world was in darkness, the people were afraid. They lived in caves as those who hunger. Then did the divine bull offer himself as a sacrifice for their sake, and he was reborn as the sun.
This is meant to allude to a stone age era of cave dwelling humans, and the myth of their salvation through the creation of the sun, which in this case represents the coming of "light" in the broadest sense. The primitive cave dwellers emerge from the stone age, achieve greater knowledge of the world and greater technological and spiritual advancement, and this is credited in a religious sense to the voluntary sacrifice of the most holy creation.
The god of the sea is their father, and the divine bull is his son. When the world was in darkness, the people were afraid. They lived in caves as those who hunger. Then did the divine bull offer himself as a sacrifice for their sake, and he was reborn as the sun.
This is meant to allude to a stone age era of cave dwelling humans, and the myth of their salvation through the creation of the sun, which in this case represents the coming of "light" in the broadest sense. The primitive cave dwellers emerge from the stone age, achieve greater knowledge of the world and greater technological and spiritual advancement, and this is credited in a religious sense to the voluntary sacrifice of the most holy creation.
Saturday, July 21, 2018
Atlantis Creation Myth
This is an invented fragment of an Atlantean creation myth, again done with Greek and Linear B script.My idea is that it's part of a later compilation, and so draws from multiple sources. Thus, like real mythological texts, there's a contradictory doublet. Enjoy.
When the woman came out of the sea, riding a bull, the land was empty and without life.
And the stars, looking down, desired the woman, and shot arrows and slew the bull.
Therefore the sun banished them to the far sky to drift forever.
But one among the stars did not shoot an arrow, who is called the North Star and the Faithful One.
Now the woman mourned the death of the bull, and the sun pitied her. So the sun sent forth a wise serpent, and the serpent said, "Do not weep, for the bull is not truly dead, but from his blood shall come life." And the land became fertile.
Then the woman gathered seashells, and she opened them, and out of them came living things of every kind to fill the land.
So the sun caused living things to fill the Earth, and he said, "It is not good for the woman to be alone." He told her to take one of the arrows that had slain the bull and throw it into the sea. And there man emerged.
When the woman came out of the sea, riding a bull, the land was empty and without life.
And the stars, looking down, desired the woman, and shot arrows and slew the bull.
Therefore the sun banished them to the far sky to drift forever.
But one among the stars did not shoot an arrow, who is called the North Star and the Faithful One.
Now the woman mourned the death of the bull, and the sun pitied her. So the sun sent forth a wise serpent, and the serpent said, "Do not weep, for the bull is not truly dead, but from his blood shall come life." And the land became fertile.
Then the woman gathered seashells, and she opened them, and out of them came living things of every kind to fill the land.
So the sun caused living things to fill the Earth, and he said, "It is not good for the woman to be alone." He told her to take one of the arrows that had slain the bull and throw it into the sea. And there man emerged.
Friday, July 20, 2018
Atlantis Calling
It seems that all mystics worth their salt have come up with some kind of pseudohistory about Atlantis. Of course, nothing has ever been found to verify any of it. But I thought I'd throw my hat in the ring and present the closest possible reconstruction of Atlantean language.
For the words themselves, I used Greek, or conjecture about Indo-European roots for ancient Greek. Then I transliterated the phrase into Linear B script, the oldest alphabet from the Achaean and Minoan civilizations which has been thus far been deciphered.
So imagine that you're on Atlantis for the winter solstice festival, and as you make your way into the sacred grounds of the sun temple, you see the following inscription.
For the words themselves, I used Greek, or conjecture about Indo-European roots for ancient Greek. Then I transliterated the phrase into Linear B script, the oldest alphabet from the Achaean and Minoan civilizations which has been thus far been deciphered.
So imagine that you're on Atlantis for the winter solstice festival, and as you make your way into the sacred grounds of the sun temple, you see the following inscription.
 |
| The sun is the light of divine perfection within you |
Thursday, July 19, 2018
CR+C Exercise
One of the exercises of the first Neophyte degree in CR+C basically involves awareness of and directing Spirit Force (or Chi, or whatever you prefer to call it).As usual when doing these exercises, I go into it with no expectations. Nor do I do meditation exercises by the book, in terms of the H. Spencer Lewis method of sitting comfortably in a chair. On this occasion, I did about ten minutes of yoga followed by zazen, and nothing really happened. About an hour or two later, I did ten minutes of yoga again followed by meditation, and I experienced exactly what was described in the monograph.
This kind of justifies my decision to do these studies, because I'm not really looking for doctrinal ontological answers. I'm looking for experiences which broaden my perspective and give me new things to contemplate. So I consider this a success which I owe to the tradition.
Once I experienced what I immediately perceived as something the monograph said I might feel, I continued the meditation and experimented with it further, and continued to experience the same effect when I directed my thoughts to other parts of my body. There was no sense of resistance. It was quite pleasant.
After I was done experimenting with it, I just let my mind go. Immediately in undirected meditation I had the impression of a gently rolling sea, a clear blue sky and the sun shining, which reminded me of a Vishnu-esque scene.
So I'm still left with questions as to whether my practice has a devotional subtext (related to God in some form) or if it's just mental/self-oriented which is how it's set up to be. I don't feel any need to really answer this question.
Tuesday, July 17, 2018
Shaivism vs. Vaishnavism
As someone who's not Indian, my exposure to Indian religion is mostly through incarnations of Vishnu. I'm also drawn to solar deities, and Vishnu fits nicely into that. Plus there's the fact that I'm not an ascetic. I have a household, and that seems to fit in better with Vaishnavism.
On the other hand, my experiences (limited though they are compared to those of someone who's continually devoted to the path) seem more similar to those of Shaivism. My general perspective seems more oriented toward Shiva, even though Shiva is quite alien to me.The question of whether I'm engaged in worship in my practice is not one that I have a clear answer for. And I have these questions about Shiva and whether Shiva is somehow part of my work, a hidden aspect behind the scenes.
Sunday, July 15, 2018
Freudian Spirituality
Áine Órga has an excellent series on developing a personal spiritual practice, figuring out what your concept of divinity and awareness is, and so on. I would say an equally important question is "What are you into sexually?"
A lot of spiritual seekers are drawn to Jung, but I think sufficient attention should be paid to Freud as well, because Freud was right about one thing : sexuality infuses every part of our psychical being.
When developing a personal practice, you are necessarily putting yourself on Freud's couch, so to speak, and working through all the ways in which your sexuality influences your ideas about your own being, about the world, about gods and religion, and the ways you connect with others. It influences what you really want from spirituality and how you're going to go about getting it.
Our rapidly changing sociopolitical environment leads a lot of people to seek out alternative spirituality. But if your sexuality doesn't really align to particular tradition, you're not going to get much out of it even if it appeals to you on intellectual principle.
Over the years, when I've lurked and occasionally posted on alternative spirituality forums, I've noticed a strong trend among those groups toward toward incorporating the Divine Feminine back into their consciousness and their lives. There seems to be a common assumption that the reason people seek out alternative spirituality is because that feminine aspect has been neglected by the western tradition, that the Patriarchy is the a priori reason why new and reconstructed traditions exist in the first place. This is true even in the nominally Christian-based Rosicrucian tradition, with its call to reintegrate with Divine Sophia. But as I alluded to in my post on The Heroine's Journey there isn't a "one size fits all" raison d'être for alternative seekers.
A question could be asked whether the continued predominance of traditional religion is not due, at least in some small part, to the fact that many people still feel more at home in it psycho-sexually than they would feel in alternative spirituality. If their cognitive dissonance resolves itself by siding with the unconscious sexual appeal of male dominance, they will stay put rather than taking the plunge into a tradition that's more in line with their actual philosophical perspective in the modern world, but which leaves them cold when it comes to their deepest sexual urges.
Needless to say, I think this is a false choice. Developing your own practice that is philosophically harmonious is much preferable, I think, even if it's driven by a desire for the Divine Masculine that isn't considered trendy in alternative circles.
A lot of spiritual seekers are drawn to Jung, but I think sufficient attention should be paid to Freud as well, because Freud was right about one thing : sexuality infuses every part of our psychical being.
 |
| How do you feel about your mother? |
Our rapidly changing sociopolitical environment leads a lot of people to seek out alternative spirituality. But if your sexuality doesn't really align to particular tradition, you're not going to get much out of it even if it appeals to you on intellectual principle.
Over the years, when I've lurked and occasionally posted on alternative spirituality forums, I've noticed a strong trend among those groups toward toward incorporating the Divine Feminine back into their consciousness and their lives. There seems to be a common assumption that the reason people seek out alternative spirituality is because that feminine aspect has been neglected by the western tradition, that the Patriarchy is the a priori reason why new and reconstructed traditions exist in the first place. This is true even in the nominally Christian-based Rosicrucian tradition, with its call to reintegrate with Divine Sophia. But as I alluded to in my post on The Heroine's Journey there isn't a "one size fits all" raison d'être for alternative seekers.
A question could be asked whether the continued predominance of traditional religion is not due, at least in some small part, to the fact that many people still feel more at home in it psycho-sexually than they would feel in alternative spirituality. If their cognitive dissonance resolves itself by siding with the unconscious sexual appeal of male dominance, they will stay put rather than taking the plunge into a tradition that's more in line with their actual philosophical perspective in the modern world, but which leaves them cold when it comes to their deepest sexual urges.
Needless to say, I think this is a false choice. Developing your own practice that is philosophically harmonious is much preferable, I think, even if it's driven by a desire for the Divine Masculine that isn't considered trendy in alternative circles.
No Agenda
While I was meditating last night, I thought of the phrase "You will realize by doing nothing that everything is already done."
In Latin it could be : Nihil agendo senties ut omnia iam fiant
I like this formulation because it uses the etymological root of our word agenda. The proper mindset is to have no agenda, just practice.
In Latin it could be : Nihil agendo senties ut omnia iam fiant
I like this formulation because it uses the etymological root of our word agenda. The proper mindset is to have no agenda, just practice.
Saturday, July 14, 2018
Personal Altars
The youtuber Áine Órga has some excellent videos about designing a personal altar, and the reasons for her own choices.
She's had a Buddha statue on her altar at times even though she's not Buddhist, and it seems this led to some discussions about cultural appropriation and why she had it there.
Personal altars are about personal symbolism. It's not about what the wider world thinks the "authentic" meaning of the symbolism is, but about what it represents to you.
My own eclectic altar could be very misleading if you take it at face value. The cross doesn't represent Jesus, the triple moon goddess doesn't represent a typical Neopagan understanding of that figure. They're personal symbols and therefore it would be wrong to assume they mean what someone else thinks they mean.
Although the Rosicrucian cross usually has four arms of equal length, and there are symbolic reasons for that, mine doesn't — and there are symbolic reasons for that too. Mine is more masculine and phallic in design, because that's a presence I like to connect with. The triple moon goddess is me, more or less, the seeker. She represents union with the masculine presence. It has to with my own inner alchemy, and not some "objective" meaning that somebody else might try to discern.
The world is more interconnected than ever before, so people are bound to come across images from outside their nature culture(s) that speak to them. All that matters is that they get some personal value from it.
She's had a Buddha statue on her altar at times even though she's not Buddhist, and it seems this led to some discussions about cultural appropriation and why she had it there.
Personal altars are about personal symbolism. It's not about what the wider world thinks the "authentic" meaning of the symbolism is, but about what it represents to you.
My own eclectic altar could be very misleading if you take it at face value. The cross doesn't represent Jesus, the triple moon goddess doesn't represent a typical Neopagan understanding of that figure. They're personal symbols and therefore it would be wrong to assume they mean what someone else thinks they mean.Although the Rosicrucian cross usually has four arms of equal length, and there are symbolic reasons for that, mine doesn't — and there are symbolic reasons for that too. Mine is more masculine and phallic in design, because that's a presence I like to connect with. The triple moon goddess is me, more or less, the seeker. She represents union with the masculine presence. It has to with my own inner alchemy, and not some "objective" meaning that somebody else might try to discern.
The world is more interconnected than ever before, so people are bound to come across images from outside their nature culture(s) that speak to them. All that matters is that they get some personal value from it.
Friday, July 13, 2018
Divine Immanence Part 2
I identify more with rationalism than reverence, so I can critique Spinoza's puritanical rationalism as being unrealistic. It's a bit like asking someone to connect with their child only through intellectual appreciation of the qualities of juvenile humans.
Feelings are bound to come into it, even if they're messy and make us prone to error. Hence there's no stark dividing line, but more like general trends in self-identification based on what first comes to mind when we discuss attitudes toward divinity in nature.
I think Neopagans are more likely to place reverence or even worshipful attitudes toward nature front and center when trying to put a finger on what draws them to that tradition and that label. Rosicrucians sometimes also express reverence for nature, but that tends to be less central to the practice than natural and spiritual philosophy.
"How great thou art, Mother Nature!" is not the usual Rosicrucian M.O. Rather than devotional feeling, I think we find the ever-evolving code of the universe to be awe-inspiring in its complexity, and try to understand its fundamental rationality so that we can bring our own inner beings more in harmony with its laws. Of course, this is still very generalized, and not applicable to all Rosicrucians any more than pantheism is applicable to all Neopagans.
I find my own practice straddles the fence, and involves something more like a personal god-concept, as I alluded to in my post on The Heroine's Journey even though I don't believe in a personal god as an actual entity.
To engage in finely-parsed syntax as Spinoza was wont to do, you might say that I'm a Neopaganesque Rosicrucian rather than a Rosicrucianesque Neopagan. Or to put it in quantum terms, the dividing line becomes more difficult to pin down the harder you look at it.
Feelings are bound to come into it, even if they're messy and make us prone to error. Hence there's no stark dividing line, but more like general trends in self-identification based on what first comes to mind when we discuss attitudes toward divinity in nature.
I think Neopagans are more likely to place reverence or even worshipful attitudes toward nature front and center when trying to put a finger on what draws them to that tradition and that label. Rosicrucians sometimes also express reverence for nature, but that tends to be less central to the practice than natural and spiritual philosophy.
"How great thou art, Mother Nature!" is not the usual Rosicrucian M.O. Rather than devotional feeling, I think we find the ever-evolving code of the universe to be awe-inspiring in its complexity, and try to understand its fundamental rationality so that we can bring our own inner beings more in harmony with its laws. Of course, this is still very generalized, and not applicable to all Rosicrucians any more than pantheism is applicable to all Neopagans.I find my own practice straddles the fence, and involves something more like a personal god-concept, as I alluded to in my post on The Heroine's Journey even though I don't believe in a personal god as an actual entity.
To engage in finely-parsed syntax as Spinoza was wont to do, you might say that I'm a Neopaganesque Rosicrucian rather than a Rosicrucianesque Neopagan. Or to put it in quantum terms, the dividing line becomes more difficult to pin down the harder you look at it.
Divine Immanence
Many Neopagans and Rosicrucians share a belief in divine immanence or pantheism, the idea that God is present in everything that exists. But broadly speaking, the two groups differ on how they think we should approach or connect with the Divine.
If it can be said that there's a default Neopagan view on the subject, it could probably be expressed as a feeling of awe or reverence for the Divine in nature, whereas the Rosicrucian view typically follows Spinoza and his rejection of this kind of religiosity.
Spinoza felt that such reverential attitudes could easily lead to erroneous and superstitious beliefs and practices, and argued that the way we should connect with the Divine was through an intellectual understanding and appreciation of its perceptible modes of existence. The Rosicrucian call to "read the book of nature" is in line with this view.
Of course, in reality, the division is a lot fuzzier. But as a philosophical matter, the distinction may be important, and the prevailing culture within each tradition may account for why people choose to identify as one or the other.
If it can be said that there's a default Neopagan view on the subject, it could probably be expressed as a feeling of awe or reverence for the Divine in nature, whereas the Rosicrucian view typically follows Spinoza and his rejection of this kind of religiosity.
Spinoza felt that such reverential attitudes could easily lead to erroneous and superstitious beliefs and practices, and argued that the way we should connect with the Divine was through an intellectual understanding and appreciation of its perceptible modes of existence. The Rosicrucian call to "read the book of nature" is in line with this view.
Of course, in reality, the division is a lot fuzzier. But as a philosophical matter, the distinction may be important, and the prevailing culture within each tradition may account for why people choose to identify as one or the other.
Thursday, July 12, 2018
Horizonal Spirituality
Spirituality is often assumed to be ontological. It's assumed to have something to say about the true nature of being. It's assumed to involve concepts, whether natural or supernatural, which we may not be able picture in our minds, but which we can discuss in the abstract.
I propose the term horizonal spirituality for a spirituality based on perception.
Although I'm familiar with the concept of infinity, if I try to picture in my mind an infinite number of coins or an infinite number of elephants, I find that I can't. I can only picture something that fits into a finite horizon. If I can't picture something, I can't perceive it ; and if I can't perceive it, I must doubt its existence.
Perception here isn't limited to physical sensation, or to things which actually exist. I can picture someone halfway around the world. I can picture Superman flying. I can even picture the entire universe, if I picture it squeezed into a very small space, or a subatomic particle if I picture it magnified many times. In this sense, I can perceive these things. But I can't picture a maximally perfect infinite being. This is something that doesn't fit within my functional mental horizon.
Horizonal spirituality, then, is not concerned with the God that Anselm of Canterbury and his ontological successors attempted to prove through logical reasoning, but it's not necessarily anti-theistic. Rather, it's iconic in that supernatural beings that come in discreet forms can be part of it, as can other images or items that you might place on an altar and focus your attention on. It can be pantheistic or naturalistic, it's just not concerned with concepts which are fundamentally imperceptible.
I propose the term horizonal spirituality for a spirituality based on perception.
Although I'm familiar with the concept of infinity, if I try to picture in my mind an infinite number of coins or an infinite number of elephants, I find that I can't. I can only picture something that fits into a finite horizon. If I can't picture something, I can't perceive it ; and if I can't perceive it, I must doubt its existence.
Perception here isn't limited to physical sensation, or to things which actually exist. I can picture someone halfway around the world. I can picture Superman flying. I can even picture the entire universe, if I picture it squeezed into a very small space, or a subatomic particle if I picture it magnified many times. In this sense, I can perceive these things. But I can't picture a maximally perfect infinite being. This is something that doesn't fit within my functional mental horizon.Horizonal spirituality, then, is not concerned with the God that Anselm of Canterbury and his ontological successors attempted to prove through logical reasoning, but it's not necessarily anti-theistic. Rather, it's iconic in that supernatural beings that come in discreet forms can be part of it, as can other images or items that you might place on an altar and focus your attention on. It can be pantheistic or naturalistic, it's just not concerned with concepts which are fundamentally imperceptible.
Wednesday, July 11, 2018
Chivalry
A key concept of medieval chivalry and courtly love is choosing a more difficult path over an easier one. The more arduous journey is always to be preferred where the quest is concerned.
Consider the spiritual student who asks, "What is Cosmic Awareness?" What he's looking for (what he wants) is some easily digestible answer that he can easily absorb into his belief system.
But now consider how a Zen master might respond to such a question.
"What is Cosmic Awareness?"
"A rotting corpse thrown on top of a dung heap."
This is not the answer that the student was hoping for. What can possibly be meant by equating a sublime, eternal concept with one so revolting and corruptible?
In order to make any sense of this at all, the student will have to go away on his own and put in some real mental effort. And this is the point. A pat, comfortable answer proves nothing about the teaching or about the student. In each case, it's the student's effort that provides the real value.
A Zen koan is the opposite of a deepity. Whereas the deepity is a non-responsive phrase constructed to appear like an answer, the koan is an answer constructed to appear non-responsive.
There are a lot of deepities in spirituality but comparatively few real answers. Chivalry gives us pointers as to which we should choose and why.
Tuesday, July 10, 2018
Credere est inimicus fidei
Alan Watts observed that if you believe in God, then you don't really have faith. Believing in God means you're still clinging to something, whereas faith means totally letting go.Belief in things like God or souls is actually easy to let go of, since those concepts are speculative. The hard part is letting go of beliefs about things that we're certain exist.
We know that life exists, consciousness exists. They invite beliefs about them which can be difficult to detach from. To look at a simple thing like a tree and say, "I don't know what that is" almost flies in the face of reason. And yet to say, "I know what that is" is to suggest that our conceptualization of reality has no limits, which is obviously false. Or is it?
Rosicrucian teachings suggest that our objective conceptualization has limits, but our subjective conceptualization does not. Our subjective conceptualization is part of a whole which is in itself an infinite absolute.
As an article of faith, this is debatable. But the only way to reach subjective conceptualization would be to acknowledge the limits of the objective.
The teachings themselves are like a tree. We have to say ourselves, "I don't what that is" in order to approach the inner alchemy that lies at the heart of the tradition. That inner alchemy, as described in The Chemical Wedding, may be less a transmutation than an obliteration. We can only know by not knowing.
Monday, July 9, 2018
The Friars of LRC
Lectorium Rosicrucianum (LRC) or the Universal School of the Golden Rosycross is a mystical organization which, unlike many Rosicrucian Orders of today, expressly operates as a religion (at least in some jurisdictions) and does have many characteristics of a Church. It has even been labeled a cult by some, particularly in France.
Having never been a member, I can't offer an insider's perspective. But I have watched a number of their youtube videos, and there are some things in their lectures which I find appealing.
For example, one of their lecturers compared the ego to a mirror, so that when you look at the world what you really see is not the world as it is, but a reflection of yourself. This is a view widely held within spirituality in general, and fits in nicely with my Zen outlook.
There are other things about LRC which mark them as being not only a spiritual school but a Church in their own right. They talk a lot about purification, and have very particular views about personal morality which do seem puritanical if not actually penitential (no drinking, no smoking, no eating meat, etc). These aren't bad attitudes per se, but in a way it seems to me that LRC members are basically expected to live as friars or uncloistered nuns, which is interesting in terms of Rosicrucian tradition.
I feel that Rosicrucianism is generally more nonconformist and less renunciate in outlook. Worldly pleasures might not be sought after as a means to a successful life, but neither are they considered doctrinally impure to my knowledge. Whether or not the lifestyle expectations LRC places on its members are enough to consider them a cult depends on who's doing the labeling, I suppose.
Having never been a member, I can't offer an insider's perspective. But I have watched a number of their youtube videos, and there are some things in their lectures which I find appealing.
For example, one of their lecturers compared the ego to a mirror, so that when you look at the world what you really see is not the world as it is, but a reflection of yourself. This is a view widely held within spirituality in general, and fits in nicely with my Zen outlook.
There are other things about LRC which mark them as being not only a spiritual school but a Church in their own right. They talk a lot about purification, and have very particular views about personal morality which do seem puritanical if not actually penitential (no drinking, no smoking, no eating meat, etc). These aren't bad attitudes per se, but in a way it seems to me that LRC members are basically expected to live as friars or uncloistered nuns, which is interesting in terms of Rosicrucian tradition.
I feel that Rosicrucianism is generally more nonconformist and less renunciate in outlook. Worldly pleasures might not be sought after as a means to a successful life, but neither are they considered doctrinally impure to my knowledge. Whether or not the lifestyle expectations LRC places on its members are enough to consider them a cult depends on who's doing the labeling, I suppose.
Saturday, July 7, 2018
First Neophyte Initiation
I have done my first Neophyte Initiation into CR+C. I won't detail the procedure or the exact thoughts I've written down to be sent to Imperator Gary Stewart. I wish to relate what, as a skeptic committed to non-attachment, the materials and initiation showed to me individually.
The Rosicrucian material, as I see it, is not so much a set doctrines which form the basis of a profession of faith. It does not constitute the teachings of a Church, but another source of illumination on who you might be and what you think, and the relationship you might seek between yourself and the world you encounter.
Even the most strict materialists are capable of awareness of mind, that is to say, capable of seeing reflections of themselves, of their self-conception, in other people and in nature. The source that you choose to attribute this awareness to, whether it be strictly the evolutionary processes which have shaped the organic brain, or the soul which you share in some sense with God and the whole of God's creation, you are capable of focusing that awareness for the better treatment of yourself and your surroundings.
The Rosicrucian teachings may be couched in a language which you find overly mystical or unscientific, or contrary to the dogma of a particular religion in which you were raised or to which you belong. Let go of that attachment and you will still be able to find meaning in them.
This is not only conducive to peaceful coexistence, but perhaps to a better cohabitation of your mind and your body, your passing thoughts, your convictions, and the autonomic functions that keep you alive. I can see where taking Rosicrucianism as a religion would lead to either accepting or rejecting it. But taking it as a philosophy of religion or philosophy of the body may lead to a more harmonious indwelling of its concepts.
The Rosicrucian tradition is expressed now in many orders, groups and among solitary seekers. There are many rooms in "my father's house" into which you may freely move and accommodate yourself. It is a path forward for humanity, and a better preference than the regressive paths which are offered to us as binary choices.
Pax et amor vobiscum
The Rosicrucian material, as I see it, is not so much a set doctrines which form the basis of a profession of faith. It does not constitute the teachings of a Church, but another source of illumination on who you might be and what you think, and the relationship you might seek between yourself and the world you encounter.
Even the most strict materialists are capable of awareness of mind, that is to say, capable of seeing reflections of themselves, of their self-conception, in other people and in nature. The source that you choose to attribute this awareness to, whether it be strictly the evolutionary processes which have shaped the organic brain, or the soul which you share in some sense with God and the whole of God's creation, you are capable of focusing that awareness for the better treatment of yourself and your surroundings.
The Rosicrucian teachings may be couched in a language which you find overly mystical or unscientific, or contrary to the dogma of a particular religion in which you were raised or to which you belong. Let go of that attachment and you will still be able to find meaning in them.
This is not only conducive to peaceful coexistence, but perhaps to a better cohabitation of your mind and your body, your passing thoughts, your convictions, and the autonomic functions that keep you alive. I can see where taking Rosicrucianism as a religion would lead to either accepting or rejecting it. But taking it as a philosophy of religion or philosophy of the body may lead to a more harmonious indwelling of its concepts.
The Rosicrucian tradition is expressed now in many orders, groups and among solitary seekers. There are many rooms in "my father's house" into which you may freely move and accommodate yourself. It is a path forward for humanity, and a better preference than the regressive paths which are offered to us as binary choices.
Pax et amor vobiscum
Thursday, July 5, 2018
Kill the Buddha
Some Rosicrucian organizations today offer complete, self-contained religious systems ; others offer a philosophy of religion rather than a religion itself. Either way, I think it's important to view all these teachings with detachment.
To paraphrase a famous Zen saying, if you meet Christian Rosenkreuz, kill him.
The Rose-Croix is an object of desire, but it's also a weapon to kill that desire within those who seek it. "I did not come to send peace, but a sword."
To paraphrase a famous Zen saying, if you meet Christian Rosenkreuz, kill him.
The Rose-Croix is an object of desire, but it's also a weapon to kill that desire within those who seek it. "I did not come to send peace, but a sword."
Wednesday, July 4, 2018
Monday, July 2, 2018
Göbekli Tepi
For many years, archaeologists and anthropologists theorized that the development of agriculture led to larger human settlements and in turn to the evolution of complex religious rituals and temple and funerary constructions. But the revelation of the neolithic ruins at Göbekli Tepi turned this theory on its head.
At this site, hunter-gatherers who still subsisted on a diet of wild grains and undomesticated prey animals had gathered in sufficient numbers and developed a sufficiently rich religious system to allow for the building of large stone structures consecrated to purely to symbolic activities. This discovery led to the theory that it may have been the rise of complex religious activities that drove the development of the agriculture necessary to continue supporting them, not the other way around.
It has also been observed that, in contrast to earlier cave art from Stone Age peoples, which seem to depict the power of nature as supreme, the ruins at Göbekli Tepi evidence a shift in human consciousness. It is now man who is at the center of the world. No longer merely a small part of the natural world, as his ancestors had been, man had begun to see himself and his awareness as extending throughout nature, influencing and guiding it in service to himself and the otherwordly powers he believed in. Man had begun to regard himself as a chosen species, elevated above all others, both materially and spiritually.
I will reference once again the myth of Adam and Eve, in which God tells Eve that henceforth she will be placed under Adam and he will be her master. If Eve represents nature herself, we can view this story as a Bronze Age echo of that first Near Eastern awakening millennia earlier among the people of Göbekli Tepi.
In the Rosicrucian tradition, the Book of Nature is seen as another Gospel, one written by God's own hand, whose esoteric mysteries are to be sought out and examined by those who wish to raise their spirits toward a closer union with the divine. Nature contains "secret sayings" as the author of the Gospel of Thomas might have put it, and salvation depends upon understanding what those sayings are telling us. Faith alone is not enough. Sacramental religion alone is insufficient. Study, meditation and deciphering one's own internal mythology as it mirrors the exterior world is necessary to achieve the fullest possible reintegration.
This is the path that Rosicrucians and the people of Göbekli Tepi before them have laid before us. It is up to each of us to take up the cross and follow them.
 |
| Göbekli Tepi |
It has also been observed that, in contrast to earlier cave art from Stone Age peoples, which seem to depict the power of nature as supreme, the ruins at Göbekli Tepi evidence a shift in human consciousness. It is now man who is at the center of the world. No longer merely a small part of the natural world, as his ancestors had been, man had begun to see himself and his awareness as extending throughout nature, influencing and guiding it in service to himself and the otherwordly powers he believed in. Man had begun to regard himself as a chosen species, elevated above all others, both materially and spiritually.
I will reference once again the myth of Adam and Eve, in which God tells Eve that henceforth she will be placed under Adam and he will be her master. If Eve represents nature herself, we can view this story as a Bronze Age echo of that first Near Eastern awakening millennia earlier among the people of Göbekli Tepi.
In the Rosicrucian tradition, the Book of Nature is seen as another Gospel, one written by God's own hand, whose esoteric mysteries are to be sought out and examined by those who wish to raise their spirits toward a closer union with the divine. Nature contains "secret sayings" as the author of the Gospel of Thomas might have put it, and salvation depends upon understanding what those sayings are telling us. Faith alone is not enough. Sacramental religion alone is insufficient. Study, meditation and deciphering one's own internal mythology as it mirrors the exterior world is necessary to achieve the fullest possible reintegration.
This is the path that Rosicrucians and the people of Göbekli Tepi before them have laid before us. It is up to each of us to take up the cross and follow them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)