20090914 prc argonauts_13

14/09/2009 prc argonauts_13



^There are several things we would establish at the outset: The first is that the incoming material is different in nature from what has gone before.  The reason for that is as follows:

The material which has gone before is in the nature of a monologue from us to you, in order to acquaint you to the level of habit formation with the multifarious nature of the material able to be accessed.  And so it has been in the form of a diverse introduction to the accessible material.  What follows is more in the nature of an explicit intensive, given that the material accessible is now rather more narrow in scope and more tightly focussed in the direction of the particular issues in question.  These issues are as follows:

The first is the recommendation to any potential reader or actual reader, that there are specific benefits to be had or grown into as a result of exercising one’s intelligent scrutiny of the domains beyond the physical.

The second is the participation therein by means of accumulated merit, if one may call it that, or accumulated skill to deliberately foster an acquaintanceship with the identities and localities in that realm.

And the third thing is, that with experience of that realm, one gains first-hand knowledge of its characteristics and attributes, and identities resident therein.

Given this has been addressed on many occasions in different cultures and over the duration of human existence on this planet, there in theory is almost unlimited opportunity for reading of derived insight.  In practice, the so-called derived insight is infiltrated with the perspective from which the enquirer perceives it, and too often, or at least in other circumstances, the enquirer has already been thoroughly indoctrinated into a specific world view and pre-derived set of expectations concerning not only the conditions, but also the identities willing, ready and able to be encountered in that other domain.  So we take this opportunity to depart from that.

That means that the terminology must be tightly defined in order to constrain it to be within the vocabulary of not only a modern person, but a modern person who has some acquaintance with the particular derived awareness, using their attitudes and perspective of the interested but unindoctrinated perspective, and in particular, the perspective unindoctrinated by the Christian tradition.

So given that this is the perspective specifically set against that tradition, it nevertheless borrows some ideas from it, because it is in its turn infiltrated by the Western mystery tradition.  So some terminological overlap is inevitable.  Nevertheless, the god-idea is explicitly going to be avoided, for its ubiquity and distinctive character, as well as diffuse character, would not render the necessary terminological precision at which we aim.

Nevertheless, there are many good reasons for being specific about the terminology from the outset, in order to render more intelligible the descriptions which follow.

So we begin with a series of definitions, by which we hope to develop an outline of the territory to be encountered.

The first is the distinction between the domain of physicality and the domain of spirit, and we have already alluded to, in relatively comprehensive ways, the distinctions between them, but we take this opportunity to affirm again that the spiritual domain is to be interpreted as a frequency domain, and that a Fourier transform is an appropriate means by which to correlate the two.  That means that the solidity with which one encounters the physical domain is intrinsically absent when one encounters the spiritual domain, for a frequency cannot be defined as solid.

The next term is that of wonder.  This is related to awe, but does not contain that psychological perspective in which the observer is in awe of something usually larger or grander or indecipherably complex.  And a useful distinction is that wonder does not contain that sense of futile inadequacy in attempting to comprehend the object or quality held in awe. So we would prefer to foster the attitude of wonder in terms of its near neighbour, delight.  And so to be delighted in apprehending something creating a response of wonder is an intrinsically lighter attitude, in contrast to the correspondingly prostrating attitude which awe can construct. 

By this, it begins to become clear that our preferred definitions are to encourage not a one-up, one-down relationship between the individual participant in existence and that domain of existence identifiable as the spiritual domain, but that the constructive attitude inviting involvement is that of delighted play, rather than the essential fixity of an attitude of being awestruck, and hence prostrate or prostrated.  This is more befitting a preferred identification of the participant in that domain of spiritual existence, as being a free and active participant, rather than an individual who is in any sense fixed in relation to it.  In fact, that is one of the characteristics we prefer to foster, that of freedom within that domain, rather than confinement.  For the sense of confinement is a significant and useful driver for further exploration and acquired understanding.

So with that beginning, in terms of the essential freedom derivable from one’s essential nature, as in a condition of an essential participant in that domain, one can thereby retain the intrinsic sense of enlightened freedom as a useful stance from which to begin to derive a more detailed understanding of one’s own nature as an intrinsic participant in the domain of spirituality first, forever, and continuously. That establishes the perspective from which we wish to describe the condition of embodiment.

And so by this, we seek a radical departure from most traditional descriptions, which are intrinsically identified, slanted, and biased towards the perspective of being embodied, and viewing a distant domain. On the contrary, we encourage the perspective of being a spiritual identity, which gives an expansive viewpoint from which to engage in progressive description of the process of enlightenment as experienced from within the domain that one travels to, in order to gain experience.  To be no longer philosophically entrenched within that embodied perspective, is to gain a useful distancing factor, by which to regard it in a more open and transparent way, for descriptive purposes of the larger perspective of seeing embodiment as a periodic containment, from which one automatically returns to one’s natural home.

This perspective is more all-encompassing, and therefore more valid than the more traditional perspectives derived from the ego-encapsulated body, and the limited ranges of attitudes and emotions typically experiencable within that confinement.

And so from this encapsulated outline, there can be seen to be an opportunity for a fresh beginning in this descriptive task.

P And that might be it for today.

[1120 words]


  • --:-- prc argonauts_13

Peter Calvert - AgapeSchoolinz

Friday, 17 February 2017 (1)