Cathy and I will not be updating this week; we are celebrating our second wedding anniversary and will not be in town. However, I couldn’t help myself when I saw this video - I just had to share it. I don’t agree with everything the narrator says, but the core idea of culture being like a flawed computer operating system struck a cord with me. Take a look!
|
|
|
|
|
 |
I have an admission to make; for the past twelve or so years of my life, I have studied and been involved with occultism. Let me be clear of what I mean by occultism - I’m not talking about Wicca, the New Age movement, or rampant Harry Potter fandom. When I talk about occultism, I’m referring to Enochian Magick, The Golden Dawn, Thelema, Chaos Magick, as well as the study of personalities, practices, and history that go along with the Western occult tradition. I am talking about the “hard stuff” that paranoid fundamentalists only dare speak of when they are brave enough to condemn it. I know that nothing stirs as much controversy among the religious as the subject of the occult.
I also know that nothing infuriates atheists and rationalists more than the idea that it just might be possible to alter reality with a thought. It seems to be the very pinnacle of human arrogance to believe that manipulating reality in a way that is currently beyond science is within the ability of a man waving his arms around and chanting in some foreign language. It is an insult to any discerning and sane mind. This isn’t to mention the fact that to accept the proposal that the occult may indeed have some effect on reality, you would have agree that there may be more to reality than what can be empirically proven.
Most people are uncomfortable with the subject of occultism. Understandably so, as popular opinion has it that the occult is either a damnable offense, evidence of utter delusion, or incredibly dangerous in the wrong hands. I’m not going to try to convince anyone otherwise because, quite honestly, it can be all three of these things - even if not exactly in the way in which you would imagine. In my experience, though, it also can be a tool for a greater good. What I will do is attempt to explain exactly what I understand of occultism.
First of all, it is important for me to point out that, to my knowledge, there is no massive global network of occultists seeking to take over the world. 
The simple fact of the matter is that those who study the occult are far too individualistic, egotistical, and/or eccentric to form cohesive organizations strong enough to infiltrate or overthrow governments - yes, even small ones. The largest of occult organizations weigh in at about 1,000 members. Most occult organizations are lucky if they have over 50 members. Don’t get me wrong, it makes for great Hollywood fiction, but that is all it is - fiction.
While we are on the subject of paranoia, I should mention that occultists are not interested in corrupting your children. I am well aware of the use of occult symbols in television, movies, games, and fiction. There is also an abundance of Asian characters and mythology in television, movies, games, and fiction - yet no one seems to think that Buddhists are interested in corrupting children. Our entertainment industry simply has a love affair with anything that is exotic, foreign, or abnormal. The mythology surrounding occultism is also exotic, foreign, and abnormal to the majority of Western society. It stands to reason that television, movie, game, and fiction writers would abuse the stereotype of occultism, or any stereotype for that matter, to sell products. If you want to blame anyone for “corrupting” your children, blame the entertainment industry.
I’ve also learned that the occult is the an amalgamation of religious beliefs and mystical practices driven underground by the persecution of the Catholic Church. The majority of what constitutes occultism is a blend of the remnants of Christian movements deemed heretical by the Catholic Church, the scraps of lore left over from extinguished polytheistic religions, and Jewish traditions. Occultism is a direct outcome of the persecution of Pagans, Jews, and other Christians by Christians. Those groups persecuted includes the Order of the Templar Knights (widely believed to have latter become the basis for Freemasonry), Christian Gnostic sects and Qabalah. In other words, Occultism is a direct result of the persecution and intolerance of the Medieval/Renaissance Catholic Church. I know that is a bold statement, but in reading ancient grimoires, I have frequently been amazed to find the corrupted names of Greek, Roman, Germanic, and Celtic Gods, references to gnostic teachings, angels, and obscured bits of Jewish lore.
Those who practice the occult also often assert that their practice is scientific. Occultists are prone to referring to the chaos theory and quantum mechanics, and often take special interests in scientific developments. In fact, Aleister Crowley defines ritual magic as the “art and science of change.” The irony is that many of the earliest scientists and mathematicians were occultists as well. It is already well known that the science of chemistry evolved from the occult science of alchemy, and that astronomy evolved from astrology. What isn’t well known is that scientists, well into the 18th century, believed in or practiced some form of occultism. I’m not talking about a few isolated individuals dabbling in occult practices; at one time science and occult knowledge went hand in hand. The most notable example is Sir Isaac Newton’s research into astrology.
Finally, it is important to understand that occult practices are deeply psychological. Whether or not you accept the premise that ritual can affect the fabric of reality, there is no question that occult ritual affects the mind in profound ways. Ritual has the potential to reach deeper into the subconscious then prayer or meditation alone. It may even be possible to alter your subconscious with the use of occult ritual. 
This aspect of the occult, in my opinion, can be a useful tool for self exploration and improvement, but for those who are unstable, this can be dangerous. The majority of occultists are well adjusted individuals, but within any group of people there are a few who are not so well adjusted. This is, perhaps, the scariest facet of occultism, and is likely the origin of some horror stories concerning the occult.
My hope in explaining what I understand about the occult isn’t to convince you that the occult should be treated as if it were another hobby, or that all objections to occultism are completely unjustified. I think what I want most is for you to understand that there is vastly more to the subject then supposed experts would lead you to believe. The tendency is to dismiss occultism as a whole based upon assumptions, rather then investigating and thinking for yourself. I find that thinking for yourself is perhaps what is hardest to do when faced with something as polarizing as the occult. I also believe it is most necessary when faced with similar polarizing issues.
First Image provided by FrauBucher. Second Image provided by Edgar Zessinthal. Final Photo by Thomas Roche. Originally Published November 3, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you ever wondered what universal consciousness feels like? Listen to Dr. Taylor’s description of her experience - as she hits the nail squarely on the head.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Photo Above by Justin Henry. Photo Below by Wendy.
“Make your own Bible. Select and collect all the words and sentences that in your reading have been like the blast of triumph out of Shakespeare, Seneca, Moses, John and Paul.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1803 - 1882.
What exactly makes a text holy? Some would tell you it is the inherent truth of the text, the authority endowed upon the book’s author by a divine source, and the traditions surrounding the text. That is basically that person’s way of telling you which books he or she believes you should accept as holy. Seeing as each person’s interpretation of the truth, acceptance of authority, and version of tradition is a matter of opinion and personal taste, we cannot use these as objective means of deciding which writings are holy. Or can we?
Consider the possibility that holiness is not endowed upon the text by the writer, but instead by the reader. What if that which makes a book sacred is the divinity within the person who reads it? How would that change religion and spirituality? We would become more tolerant and open minded towards other religions and traditions. As individuals, our relationship with the text would be much different; we would be more willing to question our own point of view and accept another’s point of view as equally valid. Would we be so bold as to become prophets ourselves and write our own holy texts? Well, as you’ve probably already surmised, I am quite comfortable with the idea that we each could be prophets if we choose.
I can understand if the idea of prophecy rubs some of my readers the wrong way. It is, after all, the prophets that declare their own writings as the final true word of God. No one wants to be seen as being a raving zealot or, worse yet, dangerously insane. Let me see if I can ease your concerns. 
Prayer is a commonly accepted practice, used to purposely communicate your thoughts and feelings to the Divine Source. Meditation is a commonly accepted practice of silencing the mind, the result of which opens the heart and mind to listen for answers from that same Divine Source. Billions of people, all over the world and from all religions, use both means of communing with the Divine every day. The difference between them and so-called prophets is that the prophets have the sense to write down what they hear and then become famous for teaching the wisdom of the text - or rather, the wisdom inherent in the reader.
There is a down side to all this, though; you would be forced to think for yourself. Not everyone is reassured by their own judgment in what is true for them. These people would rather be told what to think rather then think for themselves. Doubt, for some, is a downward spiral rather then a purifier of faith. They see it as such, because doubt forces them to question the pillars which they believe their faith is dependent on. Like a child who believes that the trees hold up the sky, every question of doubt in one of these false pillars of faith seem to threaten to bring eternal night. This is truly sad, because you cannot have free will without doubt, and without free will, faith within holy writings is meaningless.
To write your own Bible is to reclaim that free will and reclaim your right to commune with the divine as you see fit. Religion was never meant to be a static list of beliefs and creeds, but rather an on-going conversation between man and the Divine. I look forward to reading some of your own conversations with the Divine and continuing to share my conversations with you.
Originally Posted October 5th, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Photo Above by Ngader. Photo Below by Aldo Cauchi Savona. Final Photo by Robert Jagger.
The nature of the Divine is probably the most debated issue in human history. This question has been the subject of more books, wars, and conversation than any other issue. Debate of what God is and what the Divine represents has divided families, nations, and humanity as a whole since the dawn of time. Only ignorance or arrogance would lead someone to believe that their understanding can somehow end the debate; I’d like to think that I’m neither ignorant or arrogant…
The Gated Emptiness offers a few passages on the nature of God spoken in the first person, as if the Divine itself was trying to explain its nature to us. I’ve come to adapt this perspective on the Divine as my own. To me, it seems the most logical explanation of the nature of God - but then again, I’m bias.
The passage reads:
There is nothing that separates you and me; we are one and we are falling to gather continuously.
The idea that God is one with everything and every one is not new - Eastern religions have been saying this for centuries. Yet there is this strange turn of phrase at the end of the passage - “falling to gather continuously” - which is in itself a paradox, as well contradicting our unity with God. My first impulse upon seeing this phrase is to read “together” rather than “to gather,” if only because is seems to be nothing more than an extraneous pun. But it isn’t a mere pun.
Falling together with God would indicate that there wasn’t a choice to be had regarding our oneness with God. Gathering with the Divine would suggest that it was a choice. Yet how the passage is phrased would seem to argue that both scenarios are somehow intertwine. We are one with God, but choosing to recognize that oneness over our own individuality is our choice. It is as if we are fish aspiring to be one with the ocean.
The Gated Emptiness continues:
This is my nature. I am so simple you can’t conceive of me, and I am there. You see me not, you feel me not, and you hear me not. I would blind you, numb you and deafen you if would perceive me completely, so I give you pieces. Your wine shall be my blood, your bread shall be my flesh, and your incense shall be my bone. I am the only ecstasy.
Ever wonder why Jesus compares the Kingdom of Heaven to a mustard seed? Here is my take on that parable; he is indicating the size of Heaven in relationship to the size of God. If our earth is a mustard seed compared to the Kingdom of Heaven (or even just the expanse of the universe), what does that say about our relationship with God? It’s all very figurative, of course; size is merely a human means of relating to a thing and may not actually matter on a spiritual level. However, it does allow us to understand the magnitude of God in relationship to our own existence. It is more than the human mind can handle.
Still, we try to understand the totality of existence through our sciences and reasoning. I’d say we get pretty far in this endeavor. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if the average scientist agreed that the questions we don’t know the answer to still vastly out number the questions for which we do have answers. All we have are merely pieces of the puzzle, and often times the pieces that we have don’t always fit together. It is from this perspective that we should relate to the Divine.
The next passage reads:
I am one in many, many in one, of many, of one and not at all. I am like a voice; you may attempt to describe, but one must hear it for their self. Hear you will, but impressions in the sands of the mind fade so swift that you will dismiss it for an illusion. You will doubt, and I will speak again.
Here, The Gated Emptiness gives us another clue as to the nature of God. The Divine’s existence is “one in many, many in one, of many, of one, and not at all…” It is almost like this passage is saying that polytheism, pantheism, monotheism, and atheism all are valid and are equally incomplete views of the nature of God. Which is, of course, the main message I keep honing in on with my articles on spirituality.
Comparing our understanding of God to a voice of someone we heard once is a fitting metaphor. I attempt here to describe God, but to no avail. I could try to describe my voice as being high bass/low baritone, soft and nasally, but until you hear it for yourself, you can only guess as to what I mean. If you heard my voice only once and were asked to recall how it sounded a week later, you would no doubt have some difficulty.
God is like this, in that our experiences with the Divine are hard to put into words. When we do finally put our experience into words, we begin to remember those words better than the experience itself. Ultimately our description of the experience proves to be untrue as those words were just an approximation. We then begin to doubt we had that experience at all. Yet if we seek that experience again, we will inevitably encounter the Divine again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Photo Above by Ed Schipul. Photo Below by Symphoney Symphoney. Final Photo by Roberto Arias.
I consider myself a mystic. Also, I consider myself a rather rational person who doesn’t subscribe to superstitions. However, it does not surprise me in the least that many people lump mysticism in with superstition. Perhaps you, dear reader, are one of them. Honestly, I’d rather you be critical of mysticism, and religious experience in general, than be a oblivious believer.
Mystics claim to seek, and some to have found, a greater truth than that which we can touch, see, and hear. The content of this greater truth and how it is conveyed vary from culture to culture. However, the insistence upon literal interpretation of the figurative by the culture in which the mystic resides remains constant. It is society, not the mystics themselves, who spin superstition from wisdom, absolutes from poetry, and dogma from good ideas.
I recently asked Paul Sunstone, a fellow blogger and frequent visitor to the Religious Forums, for his thoughts on mysticism without superstition, and he responded:
So far as I know, mysticism can be without any superstition and superstition is not implicit in it. The mystical experience can be described as “an end to subject/object perception” and there is nothing in someone’s experience of an end to subject/object perception that necessarily creates or promotes superstitions.
Having said that, however, I should be careful to point out that I suspect there are some sources of superstition closely associated with mysticism. In my opinion, the first and most common of those is the tendency of people who have had a mystical experience to borrow language and concepts from religion in order to describe their experience. So, for instance, someone living in a culture that routinely ascribes mystical experiences to Dionysus might be heavily inclined to ascribe their own experience to Dionysus. Or someone living in a Christian culture might ascribe their experience to God the Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, or even Satan. Or someone living in second century Rome, when the cult of Isis was gaining popularity, might ascribe their experience to Isis. And so on and so forth.
The mystical experience is beyond all categories and labels. It is only after the actual experience itself that someone might begin labeling and conceptualizing it. If they begin labeling and conceptualizing it immediately, within seconds of the experience, then they have a very strong tendency to borrow “memes” from their culture - especially their religious culture - with which to define, describe or explain it.
While I liked his explanation and could not find anything to disagree with, I quickly realized that what he was saying needed to be expanded upon. Paul’s definition of mysticism as being an end to the subjective/objective duality within an individual’s world view hints at possible avenues for discussion. Most people tend to think of things in rather black and white terms; if something is true once, then it is true until something else contradicts that truth.
For them, there exists a creature of a mythic proportions which remains unto this day the greatest superstition to ever to cloud human judgment - Objective Reality. Experiences are by their very nature subjective. If there was not a subject to the experience, it would not have been experienced. Quantum Physics, Psychology, Sociology, and Neurology have only begun to prove what mystics have long believed - true objective reality does not exist. Superstition, on the other hand, is what happens when we fail to recognize the subjectivity within our own observations.
Another distinction between mysticism and superstition is their motivating emotions. The root emotional cause of superstition is fear of the unknown. By contrast, mysticism gleefully bears a child like curiosity of the unknown, and is motivated primarily by love of truth. How can anyone not love truth?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I’ve been reading Aryeh Kaplan’s translation of The Bahir, one of the firsts texts on Qabalah or Jewish Mysticism, and I’ve realized that I am yet to write about Qabalah in any substantial way here on my blog. When I talk about Qabalah on this website, I have this annoying habit of just assuming that my readership knows what I am talking about. Pretty arrogant of me, if I do say so myself. The problem, however, is that I’m not quite sure that my definition can do it justice.
Qabalah is at once very complicated, simple, obscure, clear, self-contradictory, and internally consistent. It has often been called the Zen Buddhism of Western Culture, and, like Zen Buddhism, is a peculiar mixture of pretentious bovine manure and profound truth. Both lie and truth may or may not lead an adherent to enlightenment. The driving force behind Qabalah and Zen Buddhism is to get the adherent to think and break beyond their preconceived notions. I am not entirely sure I am qualified to speak about either, to be honest. I don’t pretend to be any more enlightened than the average angst filled teenager - my poetry certainly isn’t any better.
Yet, I am always willing to try humbly. Being forewarned of my ineptitude, I can only ask my readers to keep an open, if discerning, mind as I move forward.
The word “Qabalah” means to receive. In Jewish folklore, the teachings of Qabalah were said to have been received by Adam in the Garden of Eden, and later again by Moses on Mount Sinai. The word itself has been subject to a variety of English spellings (Kabbalah, Cabala…) all of which refer to the same body of practices, although may at times be used to differentiate one school of Qabalah from another. Currently, there are four major branches of Qabalah: Jewish Qabalah, Christian Qabalah, Hermetic Qabalah, and Red String Qabalah.
Jewish Qabalah, or Orthodox Qabalah, is what I want to focus on today. However, I want to touch base on the other three as well. Christian Qabalah is, predictably, the application of the practices of Qabalah to Christian teachings. Understandably, Orthodox Qabalists see Christian Qabalah as a perversion of the truth behind Jewish Qabalah. Hermetic Qabalah is the adaptation of Qabalah as a system of symbolism by Occult Qabalists. This is the Qabalah that I know best - The Qabalah of The Golden Dawn. Both Jewish and Christian Qabalists view Hermetic Qabalah as an abomination. “Red String” Qabalah, or pop-culture Qabalah, is the Qabalah that Madonna practices, and which you are most likely to find along side copies of the “Celestine Prophecy” in New Age shops. If you guessed that Jewish, Christian, and Hermetic Qabalists all disdain Red String Qabalah with a vitriol rivaling the toxicity of battery acid, give yourself a pat on the back.
Inter-religious politics aside, Qabalah is a means of extrapolating meaning from holy texts. Every method of squeezing further meaning from a sentence, word, or letter is used. To quote The Bahir:
Why does the Torah begin with the letter Bet? In order that it begin with a blessing (Berachah). How do we know that the Torah is called a blessing? Because it is written (Deuteronomy 33:23) “The filling is God’s blessing possessing the Sea and the South” The sea is nothing other than the Torah, as it is written (Job 11:9) “It is wider than the sea.” What is the meaning of the verse “The filling is God’s blessing?” This means wherever we find the letter Bet it indicates a blessing. It is thus written (Genesis 1:1), “In the beginning (Bereshit)…”
The reasoning behind Qabalah seems simple enough; the books of the Hebrew Prophets as they are originally written is the word of God, as such every letter of those books contains nuance of meaning that can only be understood through the methods of Qabalah. From the outside it seems a bit silly to think that just because two words begin with the same letter, or have the same letters, or are the same numerical value that the meaning behind those words are related. However, Qabalah is more of a means to an end. Assuming meaningful connections between words and ideas creates verbal puzzles seated in the text and context of the Hebrew Bible. These puzzles serve to break down the presumptions, much like Zen Koans.
Unlike Zen Koans, the extrapolated knowledge serves as a basis for an even more complicated system of symbols - The Tree of Life - from which ever more complicated riddles emerge. Each successive level of complexity is declared to deliver within it some aspect of the Truth, and indeed adherents find truth in this complexity. I hesitate to call it the Seinfeld of religions, but seeing as so many people find that show funny even though it’s not funny, this works as an excellent metaphor. When they realize that this found truth is in spite of, rather than because of, that complexity, do those who plumb the depths of Qabalah begin to shake free from the habit of literal interpretation and the belief in an absolute Truth. This is where the real work towards enlightenment begins… and consequently, where I have so little experience.
Now, you might question as to why someone would want to practice Qabalah, as it seems to be little more than mental gymnastics. But it is these same mental gymnastics that allows the adherents of Qabalah to ascribe more meaning to the world around them, and see the interconnection between all things. Qabalah pushes each adherent to question the world around them, their assumptions about that world and how it works. I admit that it isn’t the only path to enlightenment, but I love it because of it’s eccentricities; it’s more like a hobby than it is a religion, which is how I like my religion.
For More About Qabalah
Photo Credits From Top:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Above Photo by Joka2000. Photo Below by Alan Turkus. Final Photo by Joel Friesen.
Of Sandalphon, the second part of The Gated Emptiness, changes in tone and language from the rest of the text. The perspective shifts from third person to first person; little doubt is left as to whom is speaking. God speaks to us directly in these passages in a strangely humble demeanor.
I must remind the reader that this is filtered through my own consciousness. While I have perceived God speaking in a humble manner, it might be a result of my own discontent with the demanding God of the Jewish, Christian, and Islamic traditions. This means nothing as to the true personality of God; it is my understanding that our concept of personality is meaningless when compared against true divine consciousness. The text reads:
I am confusion. I am confused as you are. I am you.
Now, these three statements pose a significant problem - God isn’t suppose to be confused. Isn’t the Divine suppose to have some plan? Theologically, this can be pretty disturbing. However, there is more here than what is on the surface. The word “confusion” comes from the Latin word “confundere” which means to pour together. In the word’s evolution, it has also passed through old French as meaning “to overthrow”, before coming to the English language as meaning “mental perplexity or disturbance”.
All three of these definition play a part in understanding the meaning of this text. First, we are told that God embodies confusion. We are confused as to the nature of God, as it is beyond our ability to comprehend. What does it mean, however, to say that God is the embodiment of overthrowing? This becomes more clear with the second statement; saying that God is “overthrown” implies that God changes. Like we do, God evolves and learns through alternating between confusion and realization.
Yet this leads us to another question - why does God need to evolve or learn? With the third and final statement in conjunction with our third definition, this answer is laid to bare; we are apart of God. Just as we are several things “poured together” into human form - muscles, organs, cells, proteins, and atoms - God is also the admixture of several things; the only difference is that God’s “things” encompasses all. The text continues:
You will not be rid of me. You might shred off the fat and skin of your body, skewer your flesh with your own bone and I will be in pain with you. If you should love yourself, I would love you.
Well, if God is inherent in all things, and all things in God, it makes sense that we could not get rid of God. When we suffer God would suffer, just as when we cut our finger, we feel the pain with our finger. Should we choose to love ourselves, God would love us in return as we are apart of God. Only when we become hateful does the Divine become hateful towards us, just as we would hate cells that turn cancerous within our own body. Yet God is not done speaking about his love for us; the text continues:
Innumerous are the ways in which I love you. I love you with death and I love you with life. I love you with pain and with ecstasy. I love you with the blue empty sky and the full brown earth. I shall not save you from my love; I made you to see, and you shall see it all.
Death and life, pain and pleasure, all that is above and all that is below - all of our individual experiences are manifestations of God’s love for us. Our purpose in life is to find meaning within those experiences, to learn, and to evolve. We cannot be asked to be spared heartache, pain, and suffering; we would be in affect asking to remain unchanged, uninspired, and ignorant. Worse yet, we would be asking God to remain unchanging, uninspired, and support us like some parents support basement dwelling men and women in their early twenties.
I suspect that some would disagree with what I have written here, considering that my interpretation of this text amounts to answers for long-held insurmountable questions. To think that a few sentences are enough to answer the question “what is the meaning of life” or “why does God make us suffer” would be foolish on my part. However, I dare to suggest that what I am getting at is a fairly good guide towards answers for those questions. Like a finger pointing to the moon, it is important not to misinterpret that which points to the truth for the truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Above Photo by Ibrahim Iujaz. Gun Photo by Jaqian. Ruins Photo by David Ohmer.
The last two verses of the first chapter of The Gated Emptiness refer to a kind of Apocalypse, called cryptically as “the day all eyes close.” I have to be honest and say that these are probably my least favorite passages in the whole text. Having been raised Christian, I am all too familiar with the story of Revelations and its negative impact on the Christian dogma. Religion that relies on fear of punishment as motivation for good is disingenuous at best and psychologically scarring at worst.
However, I do not believe that these passages are hinting at some punishment, but are rather offering a warning. Let me break down what these verses are talking about; they read:
The day on which all eyes close is ever upon us. Where faith falters, hope falls. Where reason replaces emotion, compassion becomes a rule of etiquette. Where love is abandoned for convenience, strange children conceive of dust for limbs and teeth for tongues. To see completely like a yearning beast, to understand with the seat of your soul, is to turn back that day.
On the day which all eyes shall close, there will be no prophets, no artist, no seers. The gardens shall fold, the wisest shall die in crowds of writhing idiots, and all angels shall pull away taking with them every newborn. No sacrifice shall be great enough, no prayer loud enough, no cause of significant enough to hold the tide of the hollowing back.
The first thing we are told is that the day “is ever upon us.” That is to say, that the day on which all eyes close could occur at any time. Where faith - or trust in something greater than ourselves - falters, hope - or the feeling that everything will turn out for the best - falls. When we have little faith in something greater than ourselves, whether that thing is humanity or God or something else, it becomes harder to face life’s challenges. If logic were to completely replace emotion, compassion and mercy towards one another would become meaningless. All of this is fine and well, but what exactly are these verses getting at?
“Strange children” hint at the problem being discussed. “Love abandoned for convenience” is a euphemism for broken or dysfunctional families. Children from dysfunctional families are more likely to be dysfunctional themselves. When these children inherit their parent’s society, the society becomes dysfunctional. A dysfunctional society will eventually fall - that is the day on which all eyes close.
The Gated Emptiness is issuing our society a warning. It isn’t a warning of some cosmic event in which the world in which we live will be destroyed, the good rewarded, and the evil punished. This is a warning about something that has happened to societies in the past and is happening to Western Culture right now. We are becoming a shallow people, arrogant, and short sighted. The Roman Empire fell not because of the outside pressures of barbarians, but because the foolishness of their society bred weakness into every level of their culture. The same is happening again, right now, in every English speaking country.
Are we doomed? Of course not. We are each given choices, yet most of us choose not to exercise those choices, effectively choosing to allow our society to decay. However, if we were to each choose to pay attention to the choices life affords us, and exercise that right to make up our own mind, we help rebuild the fabric of our society. But are we too late? No, we are not too late. The Gated Emptiness describes the death-throws of a society; art and spirituality are discarded, truth is ignored, and the freedom of choice becomes further limited by our inability to see or unwillingness to exercise those choices.
All we are asked to do is open our eyes…
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Above Photo by Di’ goy! Zabala. Book Photo by Lin Pernille. Church Photo by Lyn Gateley.
The text of The Gated Emptiness can never, and will never, be used as the basis for a religion. It is written to discredit itself, encourage dissidence, and give the power of religion back to each individual. Realistically, I doubt that these words that I wrote in a trance will ever gain popularity, but should The Gated Emptiness manage to, the very mechanism of its language prevents the formation of a singular religious institution. This is because it reads:
“Unto earth, God saw fit to give man and woman and child alike prophecy. In the ages that passed, many books were pieced from the words grasped through the smoke and scent of the mind. Some were warped by the poisons mankind had consumed, others were broken and still others were misunderstood.”
As I have pointed out in the article I wrote before this, the trinity of man-woman-child is representative of all humanity. Whether male or female, young or old, beggar or billionaire, The Gated Emptiness claims that we are each endowed with the privilege of communicating with our creator. Not all people will take advantage of this privilege, nor can anyone claim that their communication with the Divine is any closer to truth than any other.
The passage above implies that all holy texts are flawed, including itself. This text, like all texts, was pieced together - its words grasped at due to our inability to understand. In the same way that we can not describe a scent in concrete terms, we can not put words to the absolute Truth. To make matters worse, the very methods in which we receive these holy texts, the transfer and translation of these holy texts, and our understanding of these holy texts are called into question. There is no perfection in this communication between us and the Divine; it is as organic and messy as the rest of reality.
What is worse is that the passage that follows suggests that no one religion is permanent. It reads:
“There are three books of which the first given to Metatron, the second to Sandalphon, and the last to Apollion. All these books where once in time one page and again shall return to one page. Those of the future shall forget the past. Those of the past shall forget the present. Those of the present shall forget the future. So it is with all temples; God’s hand knows no religion.”
We are confronted with the question of which three books The Gated Emptiness refers. Ironically enough, the trinity which receives each book also serves as the namesakes of each chapter of this text. Each of the three chapters of The Gated Emptiness could be written on one page and still remain legible. However, I don’t believe this is the meaning behind this passage.
It makes more sense that the three books that are referred to are the Jewish Bible, the Christian New Testament, and the Qu’ran. The believers of these three are, as the Muslims put it, people of the book. If you put this in the context in which I was raised, it only makes sense that the Jewish Bible, the Christian New Testament, and the Qu’ran are the three books referred to in The Gated Emptiness. I was raised a Christian, in a Christian society. Judaism and Islam are the only two religions that are considered as possibly being equals to Christianity in this society.
However, this passage suggests that in the same way these religions have come into being, they can and will depart. No one religion can serve as the eternal religion; there simply is no such thing. As much as anyone would like to believe that their faith is the one faith that finally gets it right, it simply is not so. All religions will falter and fail, and the only thing left will be humanity’s relationship with the Divine. That is the way God has meant it to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
