Commentary on Boris Mouravieff's Gnosis
As things
"heat up" here on the Big Blue Marble, we have received much
correspondence from individuals asking "what to do." The subject has even
come up a number of times in the egroup discussions, and many of the old
fears and turmoil have surfaced with ideas of pulling up roots and - for
reasons of self-preservation - moving here or there or undertaking to
follow this or that promoter of "methods of ascension" or methods of
"fixing the planet" so that everybody can just "get along" or we can all
snuggle up with some warm fuzzies and get some rest.
The reader
who has surveyed the material on this site has surely come to the
conclusion that what we are saying is "nothing is as it seems and never
has been," including the many religions and "methods of ascension"
promoted down through the ages.
But what is
lacking is a clearly defined WAY that might give guidance to the
seeker in his quest for the keys to his own "salvation" in whatever terms
he might define it. I have worked on presenting the WAY in both the
Wave Series and the Adventures series by sharing my own experiences
and what I have gleaned from much study and research, but some readers are
put off by material that deals with all the lies and deceptions that we
face in our reality and simply want to read something "uplifting." It
doesn't seem to occur to them that one cannot be "uplifted" as long as one
is mired in quicksand. What seems to be true is that we live in a world of
lies - ruled by lies and stealing - and that human beings lie because it
is impossible for them to do otherwise. Without a Way, that is.
As a result
of our own searching and questing for answers, the repeated trying and
testing of sources and materials, little by little we have come to the
idea of what NOT to do. But again, there has not been a whole lot about
what TO DO.
The
Cassiopaeans have indicated certain pathways to follow, but as always, we
are more or less on our own in acquiring the knowledge and learning how to
apply it - and for good reason, as the reader may know.
In recent
months however, we have been surveying a body of teachings that not only
meshes with, but vigorously expands upon the Cassiopaean Transmissions to
an extent that we cannot think that it is accidental. In fact, the
overlapping and "filling in the gaps" quality of this work is so
astounding that we are certain that the Cassiopaeans themselves are very
likely involved in this teaching in ways we do not understand.
The work in
question is that of the Russian exile Boris Mouravieff, presented in his
three part study and commentaries entitled Gnosis. Very
little information is available on the background of these materials while
a good deal of disinformation is circulating in other circles, and it is
best to address these problems before we even attempt to present the
material.
As it
happens, during our research into Boris M., we discovered that he was
being soundly lambasted by William Patrick Patterson in his book
"Talking With the Left Hand" in which he accuses Mouravieff
of "stealing" his ideas from Gurdjieff. Patterson is the author of four
highly praised books on spiritual development and is a longtime student of
John Pentland, the man Gurdjieff chose to lead the Gurdjieff Work in
America, and the editor of The Gurdjieff Journal�, the only international
quarterly devoted to exploring the "ancient teaching of the Fourth way
brought and embodied by G. I. Gurdjieff."
Just in case
the reader is not familiar with Gurdjieff, let me give a little
background. Dating from his first lectures in Moscow and St. Petersburg in
1912, George Ivanovich Gurdjieff attracted the attention of occultists and
many Western aristocrats. His teachings (often referred to as the
'Gurdjieff Work' or 'Fourth Way') became widely known through the writings
and lectures of his pupil, the famous Russian mathematician and journalist
Pyotr D. Ouspensky, and were later propagated by Alfred Orage, John G.
Bennett, Rodney Collins, and Dr. Maurice Nicoll.
Gurdjieff
himself admitted that he was utilizing 'stolen' teachings from a wide
range of groups that he had encountered (including the Yezidis, the
Russian Orthodox Church, and Sufi 'Bektashi' and 'Naqshbandi' sects in the
Hindu Kush and Pamir regions) in his world travels. A deep study of
Gurdjieff's work shows that he was obviously experimenting with his own
ideas on how to utilize bits and pieces from these different teachings to
create a system that would enable individuals to overcome ingrained
"cognitive defects," become more conscious, and awaken the Higher Self's
"Objective Conscience."
At a certain
point, it seems that Gurdjieff realized that he had undertaken an
impossible task since nearly all of his students "heard" only what they
wanted to hear. He closed his school and concentrated on putting his ideas
into allegory in his book Beelzebub's Tales To His Grandson
(1950), which also incorporated and developed additional esoteric themes
into his ideas.
Many of
Gurdjieff's concepts have profoundly influenced our present culture due to
the fact that some of his followers were famous and wealthy and had the
means to promote them to others in the upper classes. After his death in
1949, Gurdjieff's legacy was disseminated through many people, and much of
his work has been passed on through fragmentation of the many groups into
something akin to secular denominations. One of the biggest problems with
what happened to Gurdjieff's work - what seemed to be a sincere attempt to
help humanity - was further obscured by the formation of what can only be
called personality cults and identifications with Gurdjieff at the expense
of his ideas. It seems that Gurdjieff himself saw this coming at the end
of his life.
Groups that
are offshoots of Gurdjieff's teachings have been known to use all kinds of
things to reprogram their members, including isolation, group think,
authoritarian power structures, and other psychological methods designed
to unmask or break down the personal ego. But, what seems clear is that,
in the case of Gurdjieff, no one group can claim the whole cheese since he
was curiously selective about what he told whom, and even those who were
closest to him obviously misunderstood what he was trying to convey, as
evidenced by his own statements about this factor towards the end of his
life.
Mouravieff
tells us:
People
interested in esoteric matters will probably have read the book by P.D.
Ouspensky, published posthumously, titled "In Search of the
Miraculous: Fragments of an Unknown Teaching."� The ideas in
that book were presented to Ouspensky by Georges Gurdjieff.� Gurdjieff
indicates the basis of his teaching: "for the benefit of those who know
already, I will say that, if you like, this is esoteric
Christianity."
Ouspensky's book -
correctly indicated by the title - contains only fragments of a
tradition which, until recently, was only transmitted orally.� And only
a study of the complete tradition can give access to the revelation.�
The system disclosed by the fragments that form Ouspensky's book and
Gurdjieff's work, originates from revelations issued by the Great
Esoteric Brotherhood to which the Apostle Paul alluded in his Epistle to
the Romans:�
We are
assured and know that all things work together and are fitting into a
plan for good to and for those who love God and are called according
to design and purpose.� For those whom He foreknew, He also destined
from the beginning to be molded into the image of His Son, that he
might become the firstborn of MANY brethren.� And those whom He thus
foreordained, He also called; and those whom He called, He also
justified, made them righteous, and those whom He justified, He also
glorified.
What
then shall we say to this:� If God is for us, who can be against us?
[8;28-31]
Boris
Mouravieff asks: What should be the attitude of students towards the
"Gurdjieff phenomenon" and Ouspensky's "Fragments"?
The
attentive reader will easily find the answer to that question himself in
the contents of this article: we must begin by separating the message
from the messenger, and we must look for the message beyond the level or
information. This is the way to discover and eliminate error.
In a myth
well known in the Orient we are told that there exists a race of 'Royal
Swans'. The fable adds that if we put milk mixed with water in front of
one of them, it will separate out the milk and drink it, leaving the
water. That must be the attitude of students.
"Saint
Gregory Palamas said the same when he wrote in his first Triad: "As
for those people they call �theologians� or �teachers,� and think
themselves able to borrow their theological terms, is it necessary
even to mention them? Is it necessary that we keep away from "the
light which lights every man who comes into the world," and wait for
the terrible shadows of ignorance to illumine us, on the pretext that,
just as serpents are useful, this is something useful for us? For the
flesh of serpents is only useful to us if they have been killed, and
cut up and used with reason as a remedy against their own bites. Those
who kill them in this way turn a part of these snakes against
themselves, just as if they had killed with his own sword a new
Goliath, who had taken arms, who had set himself up to oppose us, who
cursed the army of the living God - someone educated in divine things
by sinners and illiterates."
The fact is,
Gurdjieff faced great difficulties at the point in time when he sought to
experiment with waking up humanity. As noted above, it was "Mission
Impossible." However, what he and his followers did manage to do was to
slash a trail through a jungle of lies and disinformation. It is not
appropriate for his followers to insist that this bare trail is all there
is and that there is no more. Rather, it is only logical to widen the
trail, to pass through the gate revealed at the end of the trail, and
discover what lies on the other side.
"Lastly,"
said Mouravieff, "let those who have profited and are still profiting
from the 'message' be sincerely grateful to the messenger and to the one
who interpreted it. If they know how, let them pray for the salvation of
their souls."
Nevertheless, William Patrick
Patterson has penned rather harsh and unseemly accusations against
Mouravieff - rather similar to our own experiences with Maynerd
Most and Alvin Wiley - that need to be addressed. As it happens,
a student of Mouravieff has done precisely that in an article entitled A response
to William Patrick Patterson's criticism in his book "Taking with the Left
Hand" by a student of Boris Mouravieff, Translated from the French by
Theodore J. Nottingham, from which the following is excerpted:
Patterson
fails to bring forth the least fact, the least witness, the least clue,
the least element of proof. He only states an opinion, his own,
considering it of sufficient weightiness to confuse it with the truth.
When
Patterson writes: "Mouravieff's negative judgment of Gurdjieff rests
on...the perception...Gurdjieff stole the teaching", the statement
suggests that this is Mouravieff's perception, a purely subjective
assumption leading to a serious accusation: stealing.
In fact,
Mouravieff reports the admission from Gurdjieff himself. He
brings a testimonial and it is the testimonial of an admission. The
minimal space given to this fact can be compared to the long
developments which Patterson devotes to his own assumptions. On one side
an admission, on the other suppositions. To which does Patterson give
more attention? [...]
Patterson's attitude
reveals a classic psychological process. We can see several aspects of
this: The first aspect is evoked by Patterson himself: "the projection
onto the teacher". Indeed, it seems that certain individuals cannot
approach the Knowledge without associating a name or a face to it. They
"personalize" that which, in essence, is beyond all personalizing; and
then emotion surpasses thought, that is, intelligence. [...] They focus
their attention on the messenger instead of the message. This
personalizing can take the acute form of veneration, not to say
idolatry. Then, all questioning of their idol, even in the name of
truth, is judged iconoclastic. The "blasphemer" must be punished --
that is, invalidated -- so that the worship of the idol may continue.
The second
aspect: he who identifies with the messenger finds himself inevitably
wounded by the "attacks" (as they see them) against the idol. His
personality, cut to the quick, will react. Pushed on by Nature -- which
refuses all suffering -- it will fall back on the "self-tranquilizing
machine".
We know
that, among the means used by the self-tranquilizing machine, there are
two primary ones: the first is sentimentality toward oneself, self-pity,
the second is accusation of the other. Each of these attitudes -- or
both together as they generally form an "infernal couple" -- will calm,
place a balm on the wound. And this will occur to the detriment of
truth, replaced by justifications and rationalizations calling
upon imagination whenever necessary. [...]
This
approach is close to being in bad faith, for instance in suggesting that
Gnosis is "verbiage and lack of clarity and comprehension
on the part of Mouravieff". This is proven wrong by many readers who
"have commented on the clarity of the text" (preface of Gnosis
II).
I would like
to add here that we most thoroughly agree that Mouravieff's work is
extraordinary in its clarity and completion of what was started by
Gurdjieff, explaining much that Gurdjieff never explained, or if he did,
those he explained it to either did not understand it, or sought to keep
it secret so as to dispense it in controlled dollops to those they
considered worthy (or who had enough money to pay for it.) Mouravieff's
student goes on to say:
He writes
(without any proof by the way): "Mouravieff, an exiled aristocrat, had
the typical sense of superiority over Russian émigrés he presumed to be
socially inferior." "An aristocrat, intellectual and moralist,
Mouravieff no doubt had trouble with Gurdjieff's unconventional
behavior." It seems that Patterson could not imagine any other criteria
to perceive others than through their social circumstances, as if a
person could be reduced to a caricature.
Patterson
criticizes Mouravieff for stripping "Gurdjieff's teaching of its mooring
in sacred science and insert it into an Eastern Orthodox Christian
perspective..." And he adds peremptorily: "The two teachings simply
didn't fit together."
I would like
to note here that the work of Mouravieff provides that ineluctable bridge
between the works of Gurdjieff, Ibn al-'Arabi, Carlos Casteneda,
conjectured esoteric Christianity, hermeticism/alchemy and the
Cassiopaeans. It should be noted that the Cassiopaeans have definitively
supported the existence and work of a man around whom the Jesus legend
formed - though they tell us that the story in the Bible that is supposed
to be history is a myth - and here we find a body of teachings that lends
background to this view, as well as supplemental information that
elucidates the many clues offered by the Cassiopaeans. In our opinion, it
is not only precipitate to reject Mouravieff's work, it is possibly
suicidal. The comments of Mouravieff's student continue:
And
yet...! Is not the System of Octaves symbolized by the musical scale
(tones and semitones) as well as by the notes that compose it (Dominus,
Sidereus orbis, etc...). Is not the origin of these notes a Christian
hymn to John the Baptist? Mouravieff reminds us of this in detail
(Gnosis, chapter 10). He therefore responds, in preventive
measure, to the issues raised by Patterson by showing that Christianity,
including its European version, contained the System of Octaves at a
certain period.
Going back
through Christianity to Judaism, Mouravieff points out the presence of
the System in David's Psalm 118. Finally, there is no question that the
Philokalia contains all the precepts of the Work and
its "Christianity" need not be proven...
Besides,
Gurdjieff himself -- as Mouravieff reminds us -- made reference rather
often to both monasteries and to Christian esotericism. And, other than
questioning Mouravieff's witness -- that is, to call him a liar --
Gurdjieff stated to him that [Gurdjieff's] System "was the ABC of
Christian doctrine".
Mouravieff
himself tells us that he learned the System "in 1920-21" in
Constantinople through Ouspensky and Gurdjieff. This does not
mean that Mouravieff did not follow other teachings, "Christian"
teachings for example (see references in the manuscript INITIATION). On
this last point, having no information, we can only ask questions: Did
Mouravieff have Christian masters? Did they know the System? Or did
Mouravieff study for himself "monuments such as the
Philokalia", and discovered on his own the keys to the
Gospels from Psalm 118?
It would
be an exceptional exploit of a self-taught person in a field where
everyone claims the importance of an oral tradition.
In saying
that Ouspensky had "never been initiated in the oral Tradition other
than through Gurdjieff", Mouravieff suggests that he personally had
access to this oral Tradition among confirmed masters. But this can
only be a deduction, based on our crediting the honesty of Mouravieff;
there is no "objective" certainty.
Whatever
the case may be, we come out of these conjectures with the observation,
which is now entirely objective, that Gnosis contains
more information then [Ouspensky's] Fragments. Mouravieff evaluated
the volume of supplementary material in Gnosis at one third more than
those contained in Ouspensky's Fragments.
How can
Patterson explain that the copier knows more than the one copied, that
the thief is richer than the one who is robbed?
Certainly,
one should analyze the nature of this additional material contained
in Gnosis. Are these traditional teachings or ideas belonging
to Mouravieff? It is also possible that Ouspensky, or his inheritors,
did not reveal everything in Fragments.
But
Patterson does not mention the objective fact that Gnosis
completes Ouspensky's revelations. Ouspensky's fragmentary
message becomes, thanks to Mouravieff, an enlarged message "in the
strict limits which are necessary and sufficient to enable the student
to go further and in depth through his own creative efforts."
Gurdjieff
never clearly announced his goal: "I certainly have a goal...but my goal
cannot mean anything to you at this time." What Gurdjieff does not
reveal, Patterson miraculously knows and can confide to us:
"Gurdjieff's mission was to establish the ancient teaching of the Fourth
Way in the West as quickly as possible."
On the
other hand, what Patterson does not tell us is by whom was this mission
given and in what way Gurdjieff was predisposed to accomplish it.
Mouravieff does present certain unfortunate predispositions [about
Gurdjieff] which are not favorable to the accomplishment of Gurdjieff's
supposed mission:
1)
Gurdjieff is more the "sorcerer" type (hypnotist) than the teacher in
the tradition of Socrates. Considering his type, his teaching activity
was in great risk of being contaminated and parasited by the hypnotic
influence that he "automatically" exerted over people.
2)
According to Mouravieff, Gurdjieff did not possess the intellectual
talent to structure and shape the teaching. He had to rely on an
intermediary -- Ouspensky. Mouravieff also has reservations on the
oral expression [of Gurdjieff] which was sometimes brutal and
insulting.
Why did
Gurdjieff hide his sources? Why does he remain silent on this subject,
except in rare exceptional circumstances, such as that encounter with
Mouravieff at the Cafe de la Paix: "I find the system at the
foundations of the Christian doctrine. What do you say on this matter?"
[asked Mouravieff of Gurdjieff]-- "It is the ABC," Gurdjieff answered
me. "But they do not understand this!"
Gurdjieff's silence
regarding his sources gives birth to a suspicion: he is silent for a
reason, because he follows a purely personal goal. This is the very
opposite to the accomplishment of a mission. Why would one who fulfills
a mission hide his sources? [A response
to William Patrick Patterson's criticism in his book "Taking with the
Left Hand" by a student of Boris Mouravieff Translated from the
French by Theodore J. Nottingham]
In his book,
Struggle of the Magicians, Patterson includes quotes on the front pages
which say:
The Magus
is the highest that man can approach to God. G.I. Gurdjieff
Toast to
Gurdjieff: God give you the strength and the manhood to endure your
lofty solitude. Rachmilevitch
Gurdjieff
is a kind of walking God - a planetary or even solar God. A.R.
Orage
In response
to these ideas, obviously dear to the heart of many Gurdjieff followers,
including Patterson, let me just point out that Gurdjieff never
accomplished the transmutation. He died just like everybody else.
Considering
the fact that several other "seekers" were reputed to have transitioned
without seeing death - Flamel and Fulcanelli among them - we might think
that the only parts of Gurdjieff's work that should interest us are the
parts that elucidate the work of the affirmed Masters. And frankly,
Mouravieff has offered many clues that do, in fact, contribute to the body
of alchemical/hermetic knowledge in a significant way.
So, in
reading these many sources and comparing, we do have some chance of
discerning the gems caught between the cracks in the pavement. Patterson
has done himself and all other seekers a great disservice in his attacks
on Mouravieff.
One of the
things that really struck me when doing the research on Mouravieff was the
following remark from the pages of the group - Praxis - that is promoting his
books:
The course
studies the Christian Gnosis of Boris Mouravieff, exiled at the time of
the Russian Revolution, who was a little-known 'third man' who
before and after WWII, and taught and practiced the Fourth Way in its
original Christian form.
This raised
the hair on my head not only because of all the material I had found in
Mouravieff's work that echoed the words of the Cassiopaeans, but because
of the remark they had once made:
07-19-97 A: Laura, my
dear, if you really want to reveal "many beautiful and amazing things,"
all you need to do is remember the triad, the trilogy, the trinity, and
look always for the triplicative connecting clue profile. Connect the
threes... do not rest until you have found three beautifully balancing
meanings!! Q: So, in everything there are three aspects? A: And
why? Because it is the realm of the three that you occupy. In order to
possess the keys to the next level, just master the Third Man Theme,
then move on with grace and anticipation.
And I can
guarantee the reader that Mouravieff presents the keys to move on to the
next level.
This brings
us back to the issue of what we are supposed to DO in this day and age
that is getting scarier by the minute. When I was at that stage myself,
asking where should we do and what should we do, I was quite surprised
when the C's responded that all of the running around to look for "safe
places" was just "3D thinking" and that the only thing that counted
was:
"Who you
are and WHAT YOU SEE."
This was
expanded with a question about what are the lessons of 3D that we need to
learn to "graduate" to 4 D:
Q: (L)
Well, how in the heck am I supposed to get there [graduate to 4th
Density] if I can't "get it?" A: Who says you have to "get it" before
you get there? Q: (L) Well, that leads back to: what is the wave
going to do to expand this awareness? Because, if the wave is what "gets
you there," what makes this so? A: No. It is like this: After you
have completed all your lessons in "third grade," where do you go? Q:
(L) So, it is a question of... A: Answer, please. Q: (L) You go to
fourth grade. A: Okay, now, do you have to already be in 4th grade in
order to be allowed to go there? Answer. Q: (L) No. But you have to
know all the 3rd density things... A: Yes. More apropos: you have to
have learned all of the lessons. Q: (L) What kind of lessons are we
talking about here? A: Karmic and simple understandings. Q: (L)
What are the key elements of these understandings, and are they fairly
universal? A: They are universal. Q: (L) What are they? A: We
cannot tell you that. Q: (L) Do they have to do with discovering the
MEANINGS of the symbology of 3rd density existence, seeing behind the
veil... and reacting to things according to choice? Giving each thing or
person or event its due? [As the Sufis teach.] A: Okay. But you
cannot force the issue. When you have learned, you have
learned!
Curiously,
this issue of what the individual can SEE was brought up in another
context - that of discerning the character of very negative forces in our
reality:
Q: (L)
Okay. Bundy described his murdering urges as a "pressure building
inside" him that he couldn't overcome, and it seemed to cause him to
stop being "human," as we think of it. That seems to me to be an example
of an implant being able to overcome a person's social behavior, or
controls over antisocial tendencies. Is this also what happened to the
person who killed JO? A: Maybe. Q: (L) Is there a connection
between the newly missing girl, CB, and JO? A: You are doing well in
your probing of the knowledge within on this issue, we suggest
continuance, after all, learning is fun! Q: (L) So, it seems to me
that there was a connection between the appearance of CB and JO. Could
it be that the individual who killed one or both of them was programmed
to respond to this particular type facial characteristic? Could that be
part of the programming? A: End subject. Q: (L) What do you
mean? A: We have helped you all that is necessary for now on this
matter. It is beneficial for you to continue on your own for growth.
Q: (L) Can I ask just one or two more LITTLE questions in a
different direction? I mean, this is like walking away and leaving me in
the dark! A: No it is not! Q: (L) I would like to be able to
solve this because the families are in pain and have asked for help.
A: Why don't you trust your incredible abilities? If we answer for
you now, you will be helpless when it becomes necessary for you to
perform this function on a regular basis, as it will be!!!! Q: (L)
Well, frankly, I don't want to be involved in any more murder
investigations. It is too upsetting. Am I supposed to DO this sort of
thing regularly??? A: Not same arena. Q: (L) Well, then how do
you mean "perform this function?" A: No, seeing the unseen.
I would like
to ask the reader to please note that the C's indicated that "seeing the
unseen" would be a necessary function and that being unable to do it would
leave me (and anybody else on the path!) "helpless." This takes us back to
"who you are and what you SEE," and leads to another important
point:
C's:
Beware of disinformation. It diverts your attention away from reality
thus leaving you open to capture and conquest and even possible
destruction. Disinformation comes from seemingly reliable sources. It is
extremely important for you to not gather false knowledge as it is more
damaging than no knowledge at all. Remember knowledge protects,
ignorance endangers. The information you speak of, Terry, was given to
you deliberately because you and Jan and others have been targeted due
to your intense interest in level of density 4 through 7 subject matter.
You have already been documented as a "threat." [...] Remember,
disinformation is very effective when delivered by highly trained
sources because hypnotic and transdimensional techniques are used
thereby causing electronic anomalies to follow suggestion causing
perceived confirmation to occur.
So, let's
get on with it: learning to See the Unseen with the help of the work of
Mouravieff.
In the
following sections, I will be quoting heavily from Mouravieff's books,
including the introductions, but often with the insertion of "modern
terms" at certain points, or terms which will make the excerpts more
comprehensible to those who have not delved deeply into such studies. It
is my hope that this condensation will inspire the readers to not only
read the works of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky and Mouravieff, but that it will
provide a broader framework for understanding the many articles and
sessions files of Cassiopaean Transmissions published on this website.
Boris
Mouravieff's trilogy "Gnosis," is
an attempt to recover and describe, in terms understandable to modern
man, a particular Tradition handed down over the centuries, in a
sometimes broken line, but one that still exists today in the Eastern
Orthodox Church.� This tradition could be said to be the Christian
equivalent of Yoga, Zen, and the other inner traditions of the far
Eastern religions, disciplines, which have each existed as
specializations within the religion of which they are a part.
It is not
one man's system or invention, but has its roots far back in the history
of Christianity - whose roots lie in certain statements of St. Paul, and
perhaps even of Christ himself.� Their development can be traced first
through formative figures of the early churches, and it clearly relates
to the doctrines expressed in the key texts of Eastern spirituality such
as the Philokalia.
It clearly
relates the oral tradition known as the Royal Way that survives
to this day in the main centers of monasticism in the Eastern church.�
But it does not claim to be a work of Orthodox theology, nor to
reinterpret Orthodox doctrine.
Mouravieff
admits that the survival of this tradition within the church is tenuous,
that the doctrine does not appear to survive in full or has not been
collected together in full.� Monks on Athos admit the existence of the
Tradition but say that it has never been fully spelled out in writing.�
The importance of Mouravieff's work is the effort he has made to collect
that dispersed information and to make it accessible in practical
form.
What are
the sources of Mouravieff's knowledge?� It is clear that his text
consists of knowledge of a high order.
There are
several ways in which the accuracy of a text can be verified, and
Mouravieff's stands up to all these methods of assay.� First of all, it
fits the Orthodox tradition as expressed by those who still possess the
Royal Way.� It evokes the confirmation of inspiration described in
Plato's seventh letter.� It predicts, in what appears at first to be
mere theory, the actual events of the life in the study of Gnosis.� It
stands the test of practice, and in doing so it remains internally
consistent.� When it does introduce ideas from other traditions, such as
the concept of karma, it does so in ways that, properly understood,
remain consistent to the overall statement of the doctrine with a degree
of precision equal to that of the mature external sciences.
Those who
can discriminate between different levels of knowledge will find in
Mouravieff and almost inexhaustible treasury of knowledge that can lead
to true spiritual transformation.� But it is necessary first to work for
this discrimination.� Without it, not only will you be unable to
differentiate between gnosis and its imitations, but even Mouravieff's
work will not release its gnosis to you in trust.
The idea
of esotericism is often misunderstood.� The clue can be found in the
Gospel of Saint John:� "I am the vine, ye are the branches: he that
abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for
without me ye can do nothing."
The word
translated "without," the Greek "choris," quite definitely means
"outside."� What this means is that in those times there was an inner
knowledge, based on assenting to traditional knowledge - gnosis - which
is then confirmed experimentally through techniques of inner
observation, and a purely external kind of knowledge, gained through the
ordinary senses.
Constantine Cavarnos
confirmed that there is an exoteric and esoteric
Christianity:
"The first
kind of philosophy, external philosophy, comprises for them ancient
Greek philosophy and the pagan philosophy of early Christian centuries.�
The second kind, "internal philosophy," is identical with the [true]
Christian religion." [The Hellenic Christian Philosophical Tradition,"
Institute for Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, Belmont, MA, 1989. p.
109, quoted in the introduction to Mouravieff's "Gnosis II]
Over the
years, this esotericism has formed a Tradition, a science, or discipline
of knowledge which may have existed before the time of Christ, but which
has since been totally assimilated to the inner meaning of
Christianity.� Boris Mouravieff says that "This Tradition, which in
Antiquity was only revealed in the Mysteries under the seal of absolute
secrecy."�
Under the
influence of self-proclaimed initiates of The Tradition such as Guenon and
Schwaller, Mouravieff has unfortunately adopted the idea that this
Tradition passed from Egypt to Judaea and thus to Christianity. However
what is clear is that the True Tradition of the Eleusinian mysteries is
behind Christianity, and it was the Egyptian Tradition that became the
false teaching that corrupted and distorted the work of the man we have
come to know as Jesus. It is only in more recent times, with much
additional research, including that of Pincknett and Prince in The Stargate
Conspiracy, that we are even able to separate these threads
and come to this understanding. So, Mouravieff cannot be criticized on
this score.
In Manly
Hall's exhaustive compendium, The Secret Teachings of All Ages, we find
mention of the fact that St. Irenaeus was complaining about the efforts to
compare Christianity to the religion of the Egyptians which included the
death and resurrection of Osiris/Horus.� Irenaeus had some other
interesting things to say about this, as Hall points out:
"According
to popular conception, Jesus was crucified during the thirty-third year
of His life and in the third year of His ministry following his baptism.
About AD 180, St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, one of the most eminent of
the ante-Nicene theologians, wrote Against Heresies, an
attack on the doctrines of the Gnostics. In this work, Irenaeus declared
upon the authority of the Apostles themselves that Jesus lived to old
age. To quote:
'They,
however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding that
which is written, maintain that He preached for one year only, and
then suffered in the twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are
forgetful of their own disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and
robbing Him of that age which is both more necessary and more
honourable than any other, that more advanced age, I mean, during
which also as a teacher He excelled all others. For how could He have
had His disciples, if He did not teach? And how could He have taught
unless He had reached the age of a Master?
For when
He came to be baptised, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year,
but was beginning to be about thirty years of age; and, according to
these men, He preached only one year reckoning from His baptism. On
completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still a young
man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age.
Now,
that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that
this extends onward to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but
from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards
old age, which Our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the
office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders
testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of
the Lord, affirming that John conveyed to them that information. And
He remained among them up to the time of Trajan.
Some of
them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and
heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the
validity of the statement. Whom then should we rather believe? Whether
such men as these or Ptolemaeus, who never saw the apostles, and who
never even in his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an
apostle?"
Well,
obviously, this "Gospel" that Irenaeus refers to as testifying that Jesus
did not suffer and die has disappeared! It could be among those of the
library of Nag Hammadi. But, commenting on the foregoing passage,
theologian Godfrey Higgins remarks that it has fortunately escaped the
hands of those destroyers who have attempted to render the Gospel
narratives consistent by deleting all such statements. He also notes that
the doctrine of the crucifixion was a vexata questio among
Christians even during the second century.
"The
evidence of Irenaeus, " he says, "cannot be touched. On every principle
of sound criticism, and of the doctrine of probabilities, it is
unimpeachable." [Anacalypsis, Godfrey Higgins, London, 1836, quoted by
Manly P. Hall]
The fad for
all things "Egyptian" has been with us for a very long time.� Schwaller de
Lubicz - the vector of many of these ideas - settled in Egypt in 1938 and
for the next 15 years studied the symbolism of the temples, particularly
Luxor, finding what he considered to be proof that the ancient Egyptians
were the ultimate examples of Synarchy, because the were ruled by a group
of elite initiates.� He failed to point out that the Egyptian
civilization was static and limited.� What's more, it caved in on itself,
and never managed to produce any significant work of benefit for humanity,
as Otto Neugebauer showed conclusively in his "The Exact Sciences in
Antiquity."
The
open-minded thinker ought to really consider the purported mysteries of
Egypt in terms of the fact that they were so ignorant that they devoted a
huge amount of energy to their "cult of the dead."� The whole Egyptian
shtick is focused around preserving dead flesh for future or otherworldly
reanimation.� The very fact that there are so many of these dead bodies
for Egyptologists to dig up is the clearest evidence that the Egyptian
beliefs were nonsense.
The whole
issue of the excitement over Egyptian civilization is the belief that they
had some power to control the forces of life because they built the
pyramids and we can't.� And has it never occurred to anybody that the
existence of the pyramids in conjunction with the worship of an elite
group of human beings, while everybody else was wearing loincloths and
sweating in the hot sun, might suggest a relationship between the two?�
The fact is, the Egyptian civilization seems to have been the chief
example of a vast chasm between the haves and the have-nots, and they
managed to do it longer than anybody else.
In examining
the work of Schwaller, we have one of the better examples of the subtle
way the negative occult societies attack those who come to bring light, by
association and co-opting.� The tactic is to find a means of subtly
allying their message with that of the truly Positive so as to generate
confusion in untrained minds which would tend on surface evidence to
accept these actually contrary messages as similar, at least in
intent.
The negative
occultists who are promoting the new Control System borrow all their
components from what is of truth, and proceed by the method of imitation.�
They literally will ape the expression of positive teachings, and all the
more carefully when they wish to be mistaken altogether for purveyors of
truth, so as to subvert the messages.
Their usual
strategy is to begin by adhering so closely to the truth as to be
virtually indistinguishable to all but heightened, thinking awareness.�
They install their ideas through the rhythmic lull of entrainment
so as to catch the "congregation" totally off guard when they finally
diverge slightly or greatly from the truth and so pull the listener along
with them.� The voice of deception is, of course, all the more
ingratiatingly imitative of "goodness" where it is addressing a listener
who is truly desirous of seeking truth; those who are lazy to begin with
don't need such careful wording to deceive them as they are already
willing to be deceived.
And so it
was that Mouravieff, under the influence of the Synarchists of his day,
introduced some of their ideas into his own synthesis of the authentic
Tradition, including the idea that the Tradition was passed from Egypt to
Judaea via Moses.
What seems
to be the Truth is that the Tradition came from the North, the fabled land
of the Hyperboreans, via Orpheus and Pythagoras.
Accounts of
the travels and studies of Pythagoras differ, but most historians agree
that he visited many countries and studied at the feet of many masters.
Supposedly, after having been initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries, he
went to Egypt and was initiated into the Mysteries of Isis. He then
traveled to Phoenicia and Syria and was initiated into the Mysteries of
Adonis. After that, he traveled to the valley of the Euphrates and learned
all the secrets of the Chaldeans still living in the area of Babylon.
Finally, he traveled to Media and Persia, then to India where he was a
pupil and initiate of the Brahmins there. Sounds like he had all the bases
covered.
Pythagoras
was said to have invented the term "philosopher" in preference to the word
"sage" since the former meant one who is attempting to find the truth, and
the latter means one who knows the truth. Apparently Pythagoras didn't
think he had the whole banana.
Pythagoras
started a school at Crotona in Southern Italy and gathered students and
disciples there whom he supposedly instructed in the principles of the
secrets that had been revealed to him. He considered mathematics, music
and astronomy to be the foundation of all the arts and sciences. When he
was about sixty years old, he married one of his disciples and had seven
children. I guess he was a pretty lively senior citizen! His wife was,
apparently, quite a woman in her own right and she carried on his work
after he was assassinated by a band of murderers incited to violence by a
student whom he refused to initiate. The accounts of Pythagoras' murder
vary. Some say he and all his disciples were killed, others say that he
may have escaped because some of his students protected him by sacrificing
themselves and that he later died of a broken heart when he realized the
apparent fruitlessness of his efforts to illuminate humanity.
The experts
say that very little remains of the teachings of Pythagoras in the present
time unless it has been handed down in secret schools or societies. And,
naturally, every secret society on the planet claims to have this
"initiated" knowledge to one extent or another. It is possible that there
exists some of the original secret numerical formulas of Pythagoras, but
the sad fact is that there is no real evidence of it in the
writings that have issued from these groups for the past millennium.
Though everyone discusses Pythagoras, no one seems to know any more than
the post-Pythagorean Greek speculators who "talked much, wrote little,
knew less, and concealed their ignorance under a series of mysterious
hints and promises." There seems to be a lot of that going around these
days! Even Plutarch did not pretend to be able to explain the significance
of the geometrical diagrams of Pythagoras. However, he did make the most
interesting suggestion that the relationship which Pythagoras established
between the geometrical solids and the gods was the result of images seen
in the Egyptian temples. And that, of course, could be
misleading.
Albert Pike,
the great Masonic symbolist, also admitted that there were many things
that he couldn't figure out. In his Symbolism for the 32nd and 33rd
degrees he wrote:
I do not
understand why the 7 should be called Minerva, or the cube, Neptune.
...Undoubtedly the names given by the Pythagoreans to the different
numbers were themselves enigmatical and symbolic - and there is little
doubt that in the time of Plutarch the meanings these names concealed
were lost. Pythagoras had succeeded too well in concealing his symbols
with a veil that was from the first impenetrable, without his oral
explanation.
Manly Hall
writes:
This
uncertainty shared by all true students of the subject proves
conclusively that it is unwise to make definite statements founded on
the indefinite and fragmentary information available concerning the
Pythagorean system of mathematical philosophy.
With what
little we have examined thus far, we are beginning to realize how true
this latter remark is. Of course, in the present time, there is a whole
raft of folks who don't let such remarks stop them. Any number of modern
gurus claim to have discovered the secrets of "Sacred Geometry!" Not only
that, they don't seem to have even studied the matter deeply at all,
missing many of the salient points that are evident in the fragments of
Pythagorean teachings. Regarding this, there is a passage in
Foucault's Pendulum, by Umberto Eco, that explicates the
problem:
Amid all
the nonsense there are some unimpeachable truths... I invite you to go
and measure [an arbitrarily selected] kiosk. You will see that the
length of the counter is one hundred and forty-nine centimeters - in
other words, one hundred-billionth of the distance between the earth and
the sun. The height at the rear, one hundred and seventy-six
centimeters, divided by the width of the window, fifty-six centimeters,
is 3.14. The height at the front is nineteen decimeters, equal, in other
words, to the number of years of the Greek lunar cycle. The sum of the
heights of the two front corners is one hundred and ninety times two
plus one hundred and seventy-six times two, which equals seven hundred
and thirty-two, the date of the victory at Poitiers. The thickness of
the counter is 3.10 centimeters, and the width of the cornice of the
window is 8.8 centimeters. Replacing the numbers before the decimals by
the corresponding letters of the alphabet, we obtain C for ten and H for
eight, or C10H8, which is the formula for naphthalene.
...With
numbers you can do anything you like. Suppose I have the sacred number 9
and I want to get the number 1314, date of the execution of Jacques de
Molay - a date dear to anyone who professes devotion to the Templar
tradition of knighthood. ...Multiply nine by one hundred and forty-six,
the fateful day of the destruction of Carthage. How did I arrive at
this? I divided thirteen hundred and fourteen by two, by three, et
cetera, until I found a satisfying date. I could also have divided
thirteen hundred and fourteen by 6.28, the double of 3.14, and I would
have got two hundred and nine. That is the year Attalus I, king of
Pergamon, ascended the throne.
You see?
...The universe is a great symphony of numerical correspondences...
numbers and their symbolisms provide a path to special knowledge. But if
the world, below and above, is a system of correspondences where tout se
tient, it's natural for the [lottery] kiosk and the pyramid, both works
of man, to reproduce in their structure, unconsciously, the harmonies of
the cosmos. [Eco]
The idea has
been promoted with great vigor for over a thousand years that so-called
Kabbalists and "interpreters of mysteries" can discover with their
incredibly tortuous methods The Truth, completely misses the point of a
truth that is far more ancient: Mathematics is the language of
Nature. The Pythagoreans declared arithmetic to be the mother of the
mathematical sciences. This idea was based on the fact that geometry,
music, and astronomy are dependent upon arithmetic, but arithmetic is not
dependent upon them. In this sense, geometry may be removed but arithmetic
will remain; but if arithmetic be removed, geometry will be eliminated. In
the same way, music depends on arithmetic. Eliminating music affects
arithmetic only by limiting one of its expressions.
Why do we
think that Esoteric Christianity is related to the ancient Eleusinian
mysteries?
The cult of
Demeter which celebrated the Eleusinian rites was well established in
Mycenaea in the 13th century BC, and it is more than likely that the Feast
of Tabernacles in Canaan was an offshoot of this activity. Our sources of
information regarding the Eleusinian Mysteries include the ruins of the
sanctuary there; numerous statues, bas reliefs, and pottery. We also have
reports from ancient writers such as Aeschylos, Sophocles, Herodotus,
Aristophanes, Plutarch, and Pausanias - all of whom were initiates - as
well as the accounts of Christian commentators like Clement of Alexandria,
Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Astorias, who were critics and not initiates.
Yet for all this evidence, the true nature of the Mysteries remains
shrouded in uncertainty because the participants were remarkably steadfast
in honoring their pledge not to reveal what took place in the Telesterion,
or inner sanctum of the Temple of Demeter. To violate that oath of secrecy
was a capital offense. For these reasons,scholars today must make use of
circumstantial evidence and inferences, with the result that there is
still no consensus as to what did or did not take place.
Many experts
have concluded - probably erroneously - that the Mysteries at Eleusis
originally must have come from Egypt. The fact is, the sanctuary ruins in
Eleusis evidently go back centuries earlier than the Egyptian Hymn
to Demeter recited by Homer that is often cited as the proof that
the origin was Egyptian. What is more, the excavations have unearthed
no Egyptian artifacts there from that period.
Many
scholars today favor the view that the cult of Demeter probably derived
from Thessaly or Thrace. They base this conclusion partly on references in
Homer and other ancient authors to some evidently pre-Dorian temples to
Demeter in the Thessalian towns of Thermopylae, Pyrasos, and Pherai;
partly on certain etymological links connecting key words in the rites of
Demeter to pre-Hellenic dialects from the north . Other scholars point out
that Demeter may be the same as a goddess "Dameter," who is mentioned
briefly in Linear B tablets from Pylos dating from approximately 1200 BC.
This evidence suggests that the cult of Demeter may after all have
originated in the southern Peleponnesus.
In any case,
whether the specific cult of Demeter at Eleusis originated in northern or
southern Greece, the undeniable parallels with worship of grain goddesses
in other parts of the eastern Mediterranean region point to frequent
contacts and the cross-fertilization of religious ideas. And we certainly
think that the Canaanite Feast of Tabernacles was a corrupted version of
some more ancient form.
As it
happens, the term "Thesmophoria" is derived from thesmoi, meaning "laws,"
and phoria, "carrying," in reference to the goddess as "law-bearer." But
the symbolism of the ark as the "law bearer" in the "tent of meeting," or
the "Mother-Delta," the "doorway to the higher realms," replaced the
original meaning and the role of women in the process. Based on our own
researches, we believe that True Christianity - which is almost virtually
unknown today - was a resurgence of a very ancient Tradition - and that
this same Tradition was preserved, in part, in Shamanic lore, was part of
the Cathar beliefs as well as the true meaning of the Grail legends.
Jessie L.
Weston writes in From Ritual to Romance:
The more
closely one studies pre-Christian Theology, the more strongly one is
impressed with the deeply and daringly spiritual character of its
speculations, and the more doubtful it appears that such teaching can
depend upon the unaided processes of human thought, or can have been
evolved from such germs as we find among the supposedly 'primitive'
peoples... Are they really primitive? Or are we dealing, not with the
primary elements of religion, but with the disjecta membra of a vanished
civilization?
Certain it
is that so far as historical evidence goes our earliest records point to
the recognition of a spiritual, not of a material, origin of the human
race. Students of the Grail literature cannot fail to have been
impressed by a certain atmosphere of awe and mystery which surrounds
that enigmatic Vessel. There is a secret connected with it, the
revelation of which will entail dire misfortune on the betrayer. [...]
It is so secret a thing that no woman, be she wife or maid, may venture
to speak of it. [...]
There is
no doubt that the Grail was something secret, mysterious and awful, the
exact knowledge of which was reserved to a select few. [�] The Nature
Cults still remain reliable guides; it is their inner, their esoteric,
ritual which will enable us to bridge the gulf between what appears at
first sight the wholly irreconcilable elements of Folk-tale and high
Spiritual mystery."
In our work
on Noah, we have tracked the Grail legends back to prehistoric times - in
Western Europe and Central Asia - via the very area emphasized in many
other ancient myths, including that of Jason and the Argonauts: Colchis
and the Caucasus regions. Mircea Eliade writes:
Recent
researches have clearly brought out the "shamanic" elements in the
religion of the paleolithic hunters. Horst Kierchner has interpreted the
celebrated relief at Lascaux as a representation of a shamanic trance.
The same author considers that the "kommandostabe" - mysterious
objects found in prehistoric sites - are drumsticks. If this
interpretation is accepted, the prehistoric sorcerers would already have
used drums comparable to those of the Siberian shamans.
Finally,
Karl J. Narr has reconsidered the problem of the "origin" and chronology
of shamanism in his important study. He brings out the influence of
notions of fertility (Venus statuettes) on the religious beliefs of the
prehistoric North Asian hunters; but this influence did not
disrupt the paleolithic tradition. His conclusions are as follows:
Animal skulls and bones found in the sites of the European Paleolithic
(before 50,000 - ca. 30,000 BC) can be interpreted as ritual offerings.
[...] Soon afterward, probably about 25,000 BC, Europe offers
evidence for the earliest forms of shamanism (Lascaux) with the
plastic representations of the bird, the tutelary spirit, and ecstasy.
[...]
What
appears to be certain is the antiquity of "shamanic" rituals and
symbols. It remains to be determined whether these documents brought to
light by prehistoric discoveries represent the first expressions of a
shamanism in statu nascendi or are merely the earliest documents
today available for an earlier religious complex, which, however,
did not find "plastic" manifestations (drawings, ritual objects, etc)
before the period of Lascaux.[�]
Everywhere
in those lands, [ in Central and North Asia,] and from the earliest
times, we find documents for the existence of a Supreme Being of
celestial structure, who also corresponds morphologically to all
the other Supreme Beings of the archaic religions. The symbolism of
ascent, with all the rites and myths dependent on it, must be connected
with celestial Supreme Beings; we know that "height" was sacred as such,
that many supreme gods of archaic peoples are called "He on high," or
"he of the Sky," or simply "Sky." This symbolism of ascent and "height"
retains its value even after the "withdrawal" of the celestial Supreme
Being - for, as is well known, Supreme Beings gradually lose their
active place in the cult, giving way to religious forms that are more
"dynamic" and "familiar" (the gods of storm and fertility, demiurges,
the souls of the dead, the Great Goddesses, etc.) [�]
The
reduction or even the total loss in religious currency of uranian
Supreme Beings is sometimes indicated in myths concerning a
primordial and paradisal time when communications between heaven and
earth were easy and accessible to everyone; as the result of some
happening, these communications were broken off and the Supreme Beings
withdrew to the highest sky.[�]
The
disappearance of the cult of the celestial Supreme Being did not nullify
the symbolism of ascent with all its implication. [�] The shamanic
ecstasy could be considered a reactualization of the mythical illud
tempus when men could communicate in concreto with the sky.
It is indubitable that the celestial ascent of the shaman is a survival,
profoundly modified and sometimes degenerate, of this archaic
religious ideology centered on faith in a celestial Supreme Being and
belief in concrete communications between heaven and earth. [�] The
myths refer to more intimate relations between the Supreme Beings and
shamans; in particular, they tell of a First Shaman, sent to earth by
the Supreme Being or his surrogate to defend human beings against
diseases and evil spirits.
This
historical change in the religions of Central and North Asia [�] in turn
altered the meaning of the shaman's ecstatic experience. Descents to the
underworld, the struggle against evil spirits, the increasingly familiar
relations with "spirits" that result in their "embodiment" or in the
shaman's being "possessed" by "spirits," are innovations, most of them
recent. In addition, there are the influences from the south,
which appeared quite early and which altered both cosmology and the
mythology and techniques of ecstasy. Among these southern influences
we must reckon, in later times, the contribution of Buddhism and
Lamaism, added to the Iranian and, in the last analysis, Mesopotamian
influences that preceded them.
The
initiatory schema of the shaman's ritual death and resurrection is
likewise an innovation, but one that goes back to much earlier
times; in any case, it cannot be ascribed to influences from the ancient
Near East. But the innovations introduced by the ancestor cult
particularly affected the structure of this initatory schema. The very
concept of mystical death was altered by the many and various religious
changes effected by lunar mythologies, the cult of the dead, and the
elaboration of magical ideologies.[including Egyptian]
Hence we
must conceive of Asiatic shamanism as an archaic technique of ecstasy
whose original underlying ideology - belief in a celestial
Supreme Being with whom it was possible to have direct relations by
ascending into the sky - was constantly being transformed by a ongoing
series of exotic contributions culminating in the invasion of
Buddhism.
The
concept of mystical death, furthermore, encouraged increasingly regular
relations with the ancestral souls and the "spirits," relations that
ended in "possession." The phenomenology of the trance underwent many
changes and corruptions, due in large part to confusion as to the
precise nature of ecstasy. Yet all these innovations and corruptions
did not succeed in eliminating the possibility of the true shamanic
ecstasy.
More than
once we have discerned in the shamanic experience a "nostalgia for
paradise" that suggests one of the oldest types of Christian
mystical experience. As for the "inner light," which plays a
part of the first importance in Indian mysticism and metaphysics as well
as in Christian mystical theology, it is already documented in
shamanism.
But
shamanism is important not only for the place that it holds in the
history of mysticism. The shamans have played an essential role in the
defense of the psychic integrity of the community They are
preeminently the antidemonic champions; they combat not only
demons and disease, but also the black magicians. [A shaman is a]
tireless slayer of demons. The military elements that are of great
importance in certain types of Asian shamanism (lance, cuirass, bow,
sword, etc.) are accounted for by the requirements of war against the
demons, the true enemies of humanity. In a way it can be said
that shamanism defends life, health, fertility, the world of "light,"
against death, diseases, sterility, disaster, and the world of
"darkness."[...]
What is
fundamental and universal is the shaman's struggle against what we could
call "the powers of evil." [�] The shaman's essential role in the
defense of the psychic integrity of the community depends above all on
this: men are sure that one of them is able to help them in the critical
circumstances produced by the inhabitants of the invisible world. [�]
A member of the community is able to see what is hidden and invisible
to the rest and to bring back direct and reliable information from the
supernatural worlds.[�]
We have
already referred to the likenesses between the accounts of shamanic
ecstasies and certain epic themes in oral literature. The shaman's
adventures in the other world, the ordeals that he undergoes in his
ecstatic descents below and ascents to the sky, suggest the adventures
of the figures in popular tales and the heroes of epic literature.
Probably a large number of epic "subjects" or motifs, as well as many
characters, images, and cliches of epic literature, are, finally, of
ecstatic origin, in the sense that they were borrowed from the narrative
of shamans describing their journeys and adventures in the superhuman
worlds. [ Eliade, Mircea, Shamanism, Archaic Techniques of
Ecstasy.]
In short, we
suggest that Esoteric Christianity - the REAL teachings of Jesus - were a
revival of the most ancient of True Traditions of Freedom - an
antediluvian tradition handed down from the Ancient Athenians of Plato's
myth - the defenders of the world against the Evil Empire of Atlantis.
This Evil Empire of Atlantis is reincarnated in the present day - the
controlling empire of our world - and seeks to establish a One World
control system exactly as Atlantis did ages ago. Part of the means of
doing this includes brainwashing the masses, even those who are seeking
alternative explanations in philosophy and religion. For those who seek
outside the already corrupted standard religions, there is now the
Stargate Conspiracy - the promotion of Egyptian and South
American mysticism as the source of the Tradition. And it is a
lie.
Christianity
is quite interesting when one removes the obvious gloss of the Egyptian
resurrection myth. When the reader is fully informed about the variations
on these two themes, it is almost pathetically easy to read the New
Testament and see what might be original to "Jesus," and what was added by
the "creators" of Christianity as we know it.
What is even
more interesting was the fact that the only writings contemporary to the
times of early Christianity, which mention it specifically, remark that it
is a "vile superstition." Yet, what we have as Christianity today, is
nothing more or less than the same religious practices of the peoples who
branded it a "vile superstition." Obviously something very strange
happened between the times of the early Christians, and the times in which
Christianity became the established religion. And whatever it was that
happened, changed Christianity from a "vile superstition" to an
acceptable, all-inclusive, monotheistic device. In short, it seems evident
that "true Christianity" has completely disappeared from the world stage
and those individuals who call themselves Christian are not, in fact,
Christians in the original sense of the word by any stretch of the
imagination.
The question
that comes to mind is: what would the peoples of that time have considered
a "vile superstition," when one is aware of what they considered normal
religious practice? The only thing that seemed to fit the bill, so to say,
is the possibility that whoever was the figure around which the Jesus
legend was wrapped, was teaching that the "God of this world" was an "evil
magician." Not only that, but that he probably suggested that man is the
manifestation of God, and all creation is the "body of God," and that
there was no point in praying to an "external god" at all. Now that would
have set just about everybody back then on fire! To suggest that sacrifice
to the gods, that appeasing the gods, that honoring the gods, that praying
to the gods, that expecting to be saved by or cleansed from sin by any of
the gods, was a waste of time would have been absolute heresy to all of
the many religions! For them, such an idea, and only such an idea, would
have been most definitely a "vile superstition."
In fact, we
have something of a parallel in some remarks about Pythagoras. He was
accused of believing the "vile superstitions" of the barbarians, that a
soul is born over and over again into different bodies as opposed to the
nonsense of the Egyptians that induced them to place all their hopes in a
physical resurrection, for which purpose they went to such extremes as
attempting to preserve their bodies for that future
resurrection!
Clement of
Alexandria writes:
These are
the times of the oldest wise men and philosophers among the Greeks. And
that the most of them were barbarians by extraction, and were trained
among barbarians, what need is there to say? Pythagoras is shown to have
been either a Tuscan or a Tyrian. And Antisthenes was a Phrygian. And
Orpheus was an Odrysian or a Thracian. The most, too, show Homer to have
been an Egyptian. Thales was a Phoenician by birth, and was said to have
consorted with the prophets of the Egyptians; as also Pythagoras did
with the same persons, by whom he was circumcised, that he might enter
the adytum and learn from the Egyptians the mystic philosophy. He held
converse with the chief of the Chaldeans and the Magi; and he gave a
hint of the church, now so called, in the common hall which he
maintained. And Plato does not deny that he procured all that is most
excellent in philosophy from the barbarians; and he admits that he came
into Egypt.
Whence,
writing in the Phaedo that the philosopher can receive aid from all
sides, he said: "Great indeed is Greece, O Cebes, in which everywhere
there are good men, and many are the races of the barbarians."[�]
And in the
Symposium, Plato, landing the barbarians as practicing philosophy with
conspicuous excellence, truly says: "And in many other instances both
among Greeks and barbarians, whose temples reared for such sons are
already numerous." And it is clear that the barbarians signally honoured
their lawgivers and teachers, designating them gods. For, according to
Plato, "they think that good souls, on quitting the supercelestial
region, submit to come to this Tartarus; and assuming a body, share in
all the ills which are involved in birth, from their solicitude for the
race of men;" and these make laws and publish philosophy, "than which no
greater boon ever came from the gods to the race of men, or will
come.[�]
And it is
well known that Plato is found perpetually celebrating the barbarians,
remembering that both himself and Pythagoras learned the most and the
noblest of their dogmas among the barbarians.[�] [Circa AD
260-340]
But, as one
notices when reading Clement, he has an agenda to validate Judaism and the
New Covenant of Christianity. He identified "barbarians" as including
Egyptians, Persian, Hindus, Babylonians, Phrygians, and so on. Again we
find that all we can discover about the deeper beliefs of the ancient
secret schools is what we hear from their detractors. In the end, Clement
promoted the idea that the "true philosophy" was Hebrew, and that it was
preserved most closely in the Egyptian "Mystery Schools." This twisting of
the facts by someone with an agenda, has been the foundation for centuries
of researchers to look in the wrong direction for the answers, and to
follow the wrong clues regarding such things as the Ark of the Covenant
and the Holy Grail.
The teaching
of Jesus - whatever his real name was - was obviously this True Tradition,
and was later corrupted and glossed by those who rewrote the Bible for
purposes of power and control.
But this
is nothing new.� Time after time the Esoteric Tradition is misunderstood
or deliberately buried, and so it dies.� Then, when the time is ripe, it
must either be restored or rephrased.� In the meantime, the meaning is
kept alive in communities or schools symbolized by the name "ark," of
which Noah's Ark was one.
A clear
sign that the inner knowledge has been misunderstood is the idea that
the inner knowledge is "secret."� This misunderstanding comes from a
lack of comprehension of the term "inner" itself.� The impression is
conveyed that these ideas are the possession of an "inner group" and are
not to be given to others, when nothing could be further from the
truth.� The real problem is due to what we now understand as "vectors of
direction," the many "agents of the Matrix" in our reality who interpret
the terminology in a purely material way, and promote their versions on
the unsuspecting public.� An example is the case of the crucifixion
itself.� The words that Paul used to describe "Christ crucified" have
nothing to do with an historical event, and everything to do with an
"inner event."� The crucifixion describes things which can and do happen
within and between serious esoteric students and is a clear analogy for
problems of the inner life of man which urgently require study.� Those
who understand the crucifixion in a purely outward way, or who cling to
the past as promoted by the Control System, miss the living
tradition.
As Jesus
said:� "let the dead bury the dead."
The fact
is: inner knowledge is freely available to all those who are willing to
look into themselves and face the pain that this
brings.
Boris
Mouravieff tells us that the Christian Esoteric Tradition has always
remained alive within certain monasteries in Greece, Russia, and
elsewhere.� It is true that this knowledge was hermetically hidden, but at
the same time, its existence was known and access to it was never
forbidden to those seriously interested in esoteric questions.
Mouravieff
tells us that his commentaries are drawn directly from the Eastern
Christian Tradition: the sacred texts, the commentaries written around
these texts, and especially from the Philokalia which is,
above all, the same teaching and discipline, transmitted by fully
authorized individuals.
Attentive
examination and comparison of Mouravieff's work to that of Ouspensky and
Gurdjieff will show the incomplete character of the latter, as well as the
deviations from the ancient doctrine.
Christ
categorically affirmed that entry into the Kingdom of God is closed to
those who have not been born anew.� This second Birth is the object
and goal of esoteric work.
Mouravieff
tells us:
The
greatest genuine faith, human intelligence, and goodwill, are not
sufficient to prevent errors and deviations in everything that touches
the domain of Revelation.� The errors and deviations of Ouspensky's book
[declared by Gurdjieff to have been accurate as far as it went] - attest
to the fact that it was not written under the aegis of the Esoteric
Brotherhood.� This means that the facts on which the book was based have
a fragmentary character,� In the esoteric realm, all fragmentary
knowledge is a source of danger.
As it was in
the past, so it is in the present:� certain Gnostic schools, seeing the
imperfection of the created world, and without searching for the reason
for the existence of these imperfections, have, by a shortcut of thought,
jumped to conclusions. One modern day example is the work of Dr. J.S.
Chiappalone.
The
Tradition is One, whether it is the esoteric core of Hinduism, Buddhism,
Sufism, or Sufism, and whoever delves deeply into these things cannot
fail to note the Unity of the teachings.� All the great religions which
have issued from the One Tradition are messages of truth - yet each of
them addresses only part of humanity - parts with certain character.�
Esoteric Christianity , in its perfect expression, aims at a general
resurrection while other doctrines, even though they belong to the
Truth, essentially aim at individual salvation and are therefore only
partial revelations of the Tradition.
Most of
the writings of the Philokalia were intended for people
who had already acquired some proficiency in esoteric studies.� One
could actually say the same about the Gospels, corrupted and glossed
though they be.� Bishop Theophan, in his preface to the Philokalia,
insists on the fact that without help nobody can succeed in penetrating
the doctrine.� This is why esoteric science conserves and cultivates an
oral tradition which brings the letter to life.� Oriental Orthodoxy has
known how to keep this Tradition intact by applying the absolute rule of
Hermetism in each particular case.� From generation to generation, ever
since the time of the Apostles, it has led its disciples up to mystic
experience.
If
Hermetism has provided a safeguard for nearly twenty centuries, it must
be said that circumstances have now changed.� At the current point in
history, as at the time of the Coming of Christ, the veil has been
partially raised.� Therefore, for those who want to advance beyond book
knowledge, which never goes beyond the domain of information; for those
who intensely seek the true sense of life, who want to understand the
significance of the mission of those who labor in the vineyards of the
Lord at the time of the Harvest, the possibility exists for initiation
into this divine Wisdom, mysterious and hidden.
Mouravieff
tells us that clarity of the New Testament can be extracted from obscurity
by comparison to the Slavonic texts.� There are two reasons for this.� The
first is that the translation of the New Testament into Slavonic was done
at a time when the spirit of the texts still remained close to the
original meaning.� The second is that the fixed nature of the Slavonic
languages, Russian in particular, remain very close to the old Slavonic
language which is still in used in the divine service of the Orthodox
religion in the Slavic countries.
The
Slavonic text is generally attributed to Constantine the Philosopher,
also known as St. Cyril, and to his brother St. Methodius, both learned
Greeks from Salonika.� Arriving in Chersonese of Tauric, St. Cyril
found, in the ninth century, that the Gospels were already written in
this language, suggesting that they were produced in a period when the
forms remained alive - as stated by the apostle St. Andrew, who taught
Christianity in Russia in the first century of the present era� close to
the time of the events.
Mouravieff
notes that all serious esoteric teaching, as in ordinary education, is
almost uniform.
It is
generally accepted that nobody can go on to secondary school without
having completed an elementary education.� Nor can a person be admitted
to a university without having a secondary education.� These graduations
automatically "select" those able to become active members of the
cultural elite of human society.
Exactly
the same is true in the esoteric Tradition.
However,
in our modern world, we encounter a curious phenomenon.� For example: we
would not seek to discuss Newton's binomial theorem without having
studied algebra, for without this, every opinion we expressed on the
subject would be worthless.
Yet, in the
esoteric field, we find a host of "experts" who declare their opinions on
esotericism without having ever learned even the rudiments of this
knowledge.
At the
same time, some of them demand "simplicity" from esoteric teachings on
the generally accepted principle that Truth itself must be simple.� They
conclude from this that access to Truth ought to likewise be simple.�
Then they assert that the methods to access Truth must be easily
assimilable.
This
argument would be perfectly correct if human beings and the problems
they face were simple and just.� However, that is not the case.� There
is a long road to travel from our state of distorted inner disorder to
any "original simplicity."
In
practice, the doctrine of "simplicity" - if regarded as an axiom - turns
the student aside from the strait gate and the narrow way that leads to
Life.� Impelled by this counter-truth, he believes he stands before this
door, when he is in reality - although undoubtedly in perfectly good
faith - walking the wide path that leads to perdition, ad majorem
Diaboli gloriam, of course.
The
Doctrine of Simplicity, correct in itself, but wrongly interpreted,
becomes a snare for hearts and minds that are already too corrupt; a
danger which should be recognized and avoided.
Some
people complain that the subject of the fundamentals of esotericism is
not simple.� Others have said that it leads to great clarity.� This
apparent contradiction is explained by the fact that esotericism is
addressed to readers who are predisposed to esoteric culture by their
nature, formation or personal experience.
Jesus
said: "Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheep's clothing,
but inwardly they are ravening wolves."� And then he adds:� "You shall
know them by their fruits."
It is
difficult, if not impossible, for an esoterically unevolved person to
discern false prophets spontaneously.� He will recognize them more
easily by their "fruits," by the observable results of their works,
which serve as signs.� The Tradition knows and teaches a whole Science
of signs.
Jesus
further said:� "Temptations (snares, traps set to entice to sin) are
sure to come, but woe to him by or through whom they come!� It would
be more profitable for him if a millstone were hung around his neck
and he were hurled into the sea than that he should cause to sin or be
a snare�"
This
warning is disturbing, but its value is real.� A thief can carry off our
wealth; a 'ravening wolf' can deprive us of salvation.�
That
'ravening wolves' appear in sheep's clothing we shall learn from the
following text, well-phrased to frighten us:
"It is
not everyone that saith unto me:� Lord, Lord, who shall enter into the
kingdom of heaven, but he that accomplishes the will of my Father
which is in Heaven.� Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have
we not prophesied in thy name?� And in thy name have cast out devils?�
And in thy name done many wonderful works?� And then I shall declare
unto them, I never knew you: depart from Me, ye who work
iniquity."
The
conclusion is that neither prophecies that are fulfilled nor the
occurrence of miracles give us any surety against 'ravening
wolves.'
And in
our own times: "There shall arise false Christs, and false prophets,
and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were
possible, they should deceive the very elect."
Our era is
the time of Transition.� We are in the heart of this period, which is
relatively short.� All the signs show that the necessary conditions for
the End are emerging before our very eyes.
This time
brings with it a great preparatory task for the transition to the
approaching Cycle of the Holy Spirit.� The preparatory task fundamental
to the Time of Transition can and must be accomplished under the Aegis
of the Absolute, for human beings and BY human beings.� Success
depends upon the emergence in the near future of a sufficient number of
people belonging to a new human type - torch bearers who have an innate
predisposition for esoteric work.� And, it is Women who must play the
inspirational role in this difficult time of Transition leading to the
promised era of redemption.
The
objective of esoteric work is the march towards Consciousness, which
means towards Truth.� The final aim that man can hope to achieve by
esoteric work is to attain the Second Birth and so overcome Death.�
With rare
exceptions, this aim can only be attained by the student through hared
and methodical work.� The sum of the conscious efforts required is
proportional to the degeneracy of the Personality.
The
discipline is accepted voluntarily, but it is of iron.� The student can
abandon the work at any moment to return to worldly
interests.
The
freedom of choice and the initiative demanded of the seeker bring a
danger: that of taking the false for the true; the impure for the pure,
allowing himself to become subject to traps and snares.� When such
errors are made by the pure in heart, they will be warned in time, even
if they persist in their error.�
The real
danger, which can lead to mortal sin, to a definite check, occurs when
an impure heart seeks to be served by higher psychic forces for its own
egoistic ends.� This is a quagmire.
A curious
phenomenon often occurs in the human mind when it considers the
generally hermetized theories and facts of the esoteric
realm.
In any
field of science, pure, moral, applied, it is generally accepted that we
must be well versed in a subject before we can give a valid opinion.� To
speak seriously, one must speak of what one knows, which presupposes
previous studies.
In the
esoteric domain, many purveyors of "esoteric science" believe themselves
to be competent without even completing an elementary education.� They
may receive all kinds of "insights" and messages from all kinds of
sources, but the problem with that is that they judge these messages and
teachings to be positive or true before they have even developed within
themselves the correct instrument with which to judge.
The
problem is:� we KNOW that any given thing can only be conceived,
understood and judged by something similar or higher.� Without this, all
judgments, discussions and advice about esoteric facts remain comparable
to evaluations and opinions about the shade of a specific color by
someone born blind.
Just as
the world we live in is closed off, invisible to the fetus in its
mother's womb until the awakening of its birth, even so the higher
planes of Life, the astral and spiritual, are similarly closed and
invisible to us until the Second Birth.� Until then, man can only form
hypotheses or refer to the testimony of authors who have themselves been
Twice born.
As for
passing valid judgments of these facts, no one can do this until he has
himself crossed the second Threshold.�
What seems
clear is that it is commonplace these days for people of perfectly good
faith to persist in their ignorant attitudes about esotericism.� This
phenomenon is due to two principle causes.� One is the general tendency
of humans to claim qualities which exist in them only in potential, and
the second - a consequence of the first - is the deification of
Personality.� Without doing any real, prolonged work, they "trust
themselves" or rely on their own "truth" to guide them.�
We are not
speaking here of people of bad faith; we are speaking of sincere people
who stray into gross error.� Their case is precisely that of the sick in
need of a physician.� They are small "Sauls" who could be converted to
small "Pauls," and thus might become useful laborers and earn a reward
in the fields of the Lord.� But they wander in their searching beyond
the place where they could receive compensation for the work that they
have done.
In
esoteric work the phenomenalist mentality seeks facts.� It looks for
manifestations that confirm that its work is well founded, or which
simply satisfy its curiosity.� This is where the snares and traps and
greatest dangers lie.� For it is often possible to obtain the desired
"facts" quite easily from the astral realms, to which the human
personality also belongs.� When the personality is firmly anchored in
the physical body it is generally incapable of making direct connection
with the astral levels.� However, certain persons, known as sensitives,
have the innate or acquired faculty of momentarily weakening the ties of
the personality to the physical body so that, with no esoteric evolution
whatever, they are able to connect with this level - connecting to the
coarsest levels of the astral.
"Facts"
obtained this way are often regarded by people who seek them as coming
from the spiritual level.� However, this level is a vast reservoir of
psychic entities that have no contact with the higher plane, including
amongst them discarnate Personalities, who normally remain there to
await their Second Death - the negative equivalent of the Second Birth.�
This usually occurs on the fortieth day after death of the physical
body.
The
Tradition expressly warns seekers against contacts with this realm which
is so dangerous and full of the worst illusions.�
The
power of intervention of these entities in the lives of humans is a
function of the credulity they meet.� The yearning to experience
miracles, visions, etc, creates an atmosphere favorable for their
appearance, which can assume various forms, often perceptible to the
physical senses.
In the
materialist mind of the cultured man of our era, the true and the false
in esoteric research easily become mixed together.� This entanglement
shows above all in the domain of our affections, which are generally
unbalanced in us because the habit of lying has become our true second
nature.� The innate faculty of immediate discernment of the true from
the false is thus lost, and man, even the most cultured and learned,
becomes singularly credulous, particularly in the mystical
realm.
This
imbalance affects us according to law:� credulity is inversely
proportional to true faith.�
And here we
must define faith:�
Faith is
an openness and trusting attitude to truth and reality, whatever it may
turn out to be.� This is a risky and adventurous state of mind.� Belief,
in the religious sense, is the opposite of faith � because it is a
fervent wishing or hope, a compulsive clinging to the idea that the
universe is arranged and governed in such and such a way.� Belief is
holding to a rock; faith is learning how to swim � and this whole
universe swims in boundless space.[1]
In
other words, the less open we are to truth and reality, the more our
credulity grows and the more we are inclined to adopt "beliefs" and
rituals, often taking grotesque forms. In this mechanism we
can see the familiar action of the General Law of Accident which is the
essence of the Matrix:�
To inspire the man
who seeks the Way with the idea that he is already on the way.� This is
the best and the most common means used by the "Devil" to turn away the
seeker who has had insufficient warning from the narrow way which leads
to Life.� Jesus asked:
How can ye believe
which receive glory from one another, and seek not the glory that
comes from God only?
When
we accept the "glory of men," yet still believe that we are on or
walking on the Way, we fall directly under the law of equilibrium.�
Jesus alluded to this when he quoted the Pharisees who prayed in the
streets, saying that "they have already received their
reward."
It
is well understood that the human Personality, in the unfinished state
in which we find it, forms our only instrument for esoteric work.�
Better still, it is a gift; it is the talent the Master has given us so
that we may make it bear fruit.� Woe to the servant who buries it in the
earth of his body.� "Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer
darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."� And here, this
is no metaphor.�
We
must therefore work with love and with all our strength since we do not
know at what hour the Master will come.
�This being so,
the attitude of the esoteric Doctrine towards lying is clear� and
realistic.� ...We must fight energetically against .. useless
lies.
It is only by
training of this nature that we shall progressively be able to� master
the rooted tendency to lie which exists within us. �Every attempt to�
hurry things, so far as lying to others is concerned, though it be a
noble� attempt, is doomed to early failure.� We live in a world which is
immersed in� lies and moved by lies.
It is also
necessary to guard against a variant of the habit of lying to�
ourselves, one which we commonly adopt from early childhood, and against
which� we must fight by every means.� This variant is widespread because
at first� glance it appears to us to be a positive attitude.� ...When
applied to� ourselves and for our own benefit, with the aim of softening
a shock, or� regaining our inner peace after we have sinned, or excusing
our actions or� faults, this idiom crystallizes within us over a period
of time an auto- tranquilizing mechanism.� ...It is a true mechanism of
mental anesthesia,� founded on a refined and disguised lie.� It sows
hypocrisy in man towards� himself.
This
auto-tranquillizer must be
destroyed."
But we see
so often how desperately people want to be "tranquilize."� How� many
individuals have written to us asking for an answer that would help� them
feel peaceful and enable them to go to sleep at night.� They want�
"positive messages."� They want a program of meditation that will make
them� feel good, or something to do or "look forward to" that will ease
their anxiety� when they glimpse, momentarily, the reality of the Matrix.�
They want to feel� chosen and special by virtue of having been "contacted"
and performing rituals without doing the absolutely agonizing work
necessary to precipitate transformation.
Mouravieff
continues:
The permanent
link which must be introduced between the Personality and the� real "I"
is esoteric Knowledge.� The knowledge and understanding that it� permits
us to acquire represent the philosopher's stone of the medieval�
mystics.� They are capable of provoking in man the transmutation to
which he� aspires.
We must work
ceaselessly, for fear of not succeeding in time.� One must work,� says
Jesus,� "while it is day: the night comes when no man can
work."
These
commentaries of Mouravieff are absolutely invaluable, and would be helpful
to every�seeker on the path and reader of the Cassiopaean Material.� This
is especially so because Mouravieff actually describes� things that� we
have already experienced, even though we did not precisely� understand
what it was we were doing, how or even why.
For
example,� Mouravieff calls the influences of the material world, the
Matrix, the� predator's mind, etc, the "A influences."� (He has diagrams
showing how they� affect the consciousness.)� The influences of the
esoteric center, the "real� world" concealed by the "matrix illusion," the
"truth," are called "B� influences."�
He
writes:
If a man spends
his life without distinguishing between "A" and "B"� influences, he will
end as he started, one could say mechanically, driven by� the Law of
Accident.� ...He can have a brilliant career in the meaning the� world
gives to this expression.� Yet he will come to the end of his days�
without having either learned or understood anything of the Reality.�
And dust� returns to dust.
In life, every
being is subjected to a sort of competitive test.� If he� discerns the
existence of the "B" influences; if he acquires a taste for� gathering
and absorbing them; if he continually aspires to assimilate them�
better; his mixed inner nature will slowly undergo a certain kind of
evolution.
And if
the efforts which he makes to absorb the "B" influences are constant�
and sufficient in force, a magnetic centre can be formed within him.�
If this
center once born in him is carefully developed, it takes form, and in�
its turn will exercise an influence over the results of the "A"
influences� which are always active, deflecting
them.
Such
deflection may be violent.� In general it transgresses the laws of�
exterior life and provokes many conflicts in and around man.� If he
loses the� battle, he emerges with the conviction the the "B" influences
are nothing but� illusion: that the only reality is represented by the
"A" influences.� Slowly,� the magnetic center which had been formed
within him is reabsorbed and� vanishes.� Then, from the esoteric point
of view, his situation is worse than� the one he had started with, when
he was just beginning to discern "B"�
influences.
But, if
he emerges a winner in this FIRST struggle, his magnetic centre,�
consolidated and reinforced, will draw him to a man having a "C"
influence� stronger than his own, and possessing a stronger magnetic
center.� And so on in� succession, the last man being in connection with
another having in influence� "D", who will be his link with the Esoteric
Center "E."
Henceforth
in life, that man will no longer be isolated.�
To the
measure of its growth, the man will escape the dominion of the law of�
accident and enter the domain of
consciousness.
Mouravieff
then shows a diagram of the person who deludes himself and does not�
struggle against the lies of the Matrix... who has not engaged in the work
of� stripping away lies:
This
second figure, with black magnetic centers, represents the situation�
where man deludes himself and, believing he is absorbing "B" influences
and� making the necessary selection all the while, he in fact absorbs
"A"� influences... This will put him into contact with people who
possess magnetic� centers of the same nature: who are themselves duped
or who dupe others, and� who have no direct or indirect link with the
esoteric
Center.
In both the
Wave
Series and the Adventure Series, we have been dealing with identifying
these very influences and emphasizing the necessity of "collecting" the
"A" influences in terms of "seeing the unseen" of what we have called the
Theological Reality. We have also met many characters that are aptly
described by Mouravieff in his diagram of those individuals who have
deluded themselves and have created a magnetic center of negativity, and
how they attract to themselves others with similar negative magnetic
centers.
In other
words, the activities described in the Adventures series - the constant
questioning,� stripping, looking at what is difficult and dealing with it
- the shocks of� seeing the Matrix, the "man behind the curtain," the
effort to "see the unseen"� is the very activity of collecting these "B"
influences which then lead to the� "magnetic center," or "lodestar," as
the C's called it.
Q: When I
post material on the website, those people who resonate to the material
believe that this refers to them also. I have been of the opinion that
Unified Thought Form being must mean a very large group as represented
in this density. I know that we are dealing with limiting terms. But, is
this applied to people who CHOOSE the Cassiopaean option? A: Maybe
it is best to say it applies to those who recognize the application.
Q: So, if they recognize it, if they know it is them, they are part
of it. (A) But, thinking in nonlinear terms, its up to us to work to
make this precise. You are asking this question which implies that the
answer exists. But, exactly what the answer is may be it is not yet
chosen, and it is up to us to make it this way. A: Lodestar is a
clue for you.
Mouravieff
writes:
This
evolution seems a long process, an uninterrupted combat with a series
of� successes and falls.� More than once, he who searches will fall into
crises of� discouragement; more than once it will seem to him that he is
being driven� beyond the limits of his own life; he will sometimes feel
crushed under the� burden of the tests and difficulties against which he
will be pitted during his� search.�
This can
be understood when we know that esoteric science in its teaching goes�
far beyond simple information.� Its purpose, in fact, is nothing less
than the� TRANSFORMATION of the very being of those who study
it...
In every
case where esoteric science offers ALL, it demands ALL in return.� One�
must pay all.
It is
impossible to reach the true by the path of lies or hypocritical games,�
because in this case we seek to BE, rather than to "appear to
be."
Mouravieff
describes the reaction of the "matrix/ B influences" to the person� who is
on the Path:
As long
as man accepts the principle of the final annihilation of his�
Personality without a fight, he can carry on in life without attracting
the� increasing pressure of the General Law of Accident upon
himself.
The case
is totally different if he struggles to surpass the limits which it�
imposes.� He then runs against the action upon him of this Law and its�
derivatives.� It acts simultaneously on several planes: physical, mental
and� moral.� Its action on the moral plane is conceived by man, since
time� immemorial, in the form of the personification: the
Devil."
We are also
reminded of Gurdjieff's remarks about the "mechanical force"� having
promoters and adherents at very high levels who act under its powerful�
influences.� We suggest that both are 4 and 5 D STS
beings.
...Once
the first positive results are obtained those students will�
unmistakable run up against the active opposition of the law and the
"game of� the Crafty One."
It must
be realized that in placing himself under the aegis of the Law of�
Exception, man goes against the General Law of Accident, which he is
even�� called upon to overthrow, if only on the individual scale.� He
must no forget -� under penalty of "surprise attack" - that salvation
depends on victory over the� Devil, which, as we have said, is the
personalized moral aspect of the General� Law of Accident.� This is so
even though this, being a cosmic law, is naturally� a divine law.�
One must
not be afraid, as the Law of Exception is also a divine
law.
In
choosing it, man continues to serve the interest of the whole, but�
differently and in an incomparably more efficient
manner.
During
his fight against the first law, he is subject to tests that often take�
the form of temptations.� ...We are permitted to draw attention to the
indirect� nature of diabolical action.
If,
aiming straight towards his goal, which is liberation and salvation,
the� seeker successfully overcomes the obstacles and by this shows proof
of a� strength that would permit him to defy the authority of the
General Law, the� latter will begin to act upon him indirectly,
generally by the mediation of his� near ones if they do not follow the
same path:� this action occurs on the moral� plane, and often takes
emotional forms appealing to his most noble, generous� and disinterested
sentiments: to his charity; his obligation; his pity.� It� impels him
down blind alleys, insinuating that he will thus be returning to his�
duty, that by so doing he will go on walking in the right path, etc.�
This will
clarify the profound saying of Jesus that : "A man's worst enemies� are
those of his own household."
Let us
repeat:� esoteric work is by its nature a revolutionary work.� The�
seeker seeks a change of state: to overcome Death and attain Salvation.�
This� is the goal give to this work by the scriptures:� "If ye live
after the flesh,� ye must die."
The man
who lives passively under the first law, insensibly and without being�
aware of it� - even as an excellent citizen - involves himself in "The
broad� way that leadeth to destruction; he who chooses the Law of
Exception takes :� "The narrow road that leadeth to
life."
Continue to More
Mouravieff:
FAIR USE NOTICE This
site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such
material available in our efforts to advance understanding of
environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific,
and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use'
of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US
Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the
material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for
research and educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
The owners and
publishers of these pages wish to state that the material presented here
that is the product of our research and experimentation in Superluminal
Communication is offered with the caveat that the reader ought always to
research on their own. We invite the reader to share in our seeking of
Truth by reading with an Open, but skeptical mind. We do not encourage "devotee-ism" nor "True Belief."
We DO encourage the seeking of Knowledge and Awareness in all fields of
endeavor as the best way to be able to discern lies from truth. We
constantly seek to validate and/or refine what we understand to be either
possible or probable or both. We do this in the sincere hope that all of
mankind will benefit, if not now, then at some point in one of our
probable futures.
Contact Webmaster at
cassiopaea.com
Cassiopaean materials Copyright � 1994-2009 Arkadiusz Jadczyk and
Laura Knight-Jadczyk. All rights reserved. "Cassiopaea, Cassiopaean,
Cassiopaeans," is a registered trademark of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura
Knight-Jadczyk. Letters addressed to Cassiopaea, Quantum Future School,
Ark or Laura, become the property of Arkadiusz Jadczyk and Laura
Knight-Jadczyk Republication and re-dissemination of our copyrighted
material in any manner is expressly prohibited without prior written
consent.
You are visitor number [TextCounter Fatal Error: Could
Not Write to File
_cass_mouravieff1_htm]. |