Who put the Enoch in Enochian?

December 14, 2018 By Kristine Wilson-Slack in Esotericism, History Tags: Book of Dreams, Christianity, Co-Freemasonry, Co-Mason, Co-Masonry, Co-Masons, Comparative Religion, Death, Edward Kelley, Elias Ashmole, Enoch, Fallen Angels, Freemason, Freemasonry, Freemasons, Genesis, God, Idris, John Dee, Mason, Masonic, Metatron, Nephilim, Quran, Royal Society, Surah Al-Anbiya, Surah Maryam, The Bible, The Book of Enoch, The Book of Watchers, Tree of Life 1 Comment

“Enoch was son of Jared and fathered Methuselah. The text of the Book of Genesis says Enoch lived 365 years before he was “taken” by God. The text reads that Enoch “walked with God: and he was no more; for God took him” (Gen 5:21–24), which some Christians interpret as Enoch’s entering Heaven alive.” (Wikipedia) This is what I learned about Enoch early on in my “Bible as Literature” class in high school. I was intrigued and the name of Enoch stayed with me ever since. “Walking with god” took on so many different meanings – he was transported to heaven and his physical body never died, or that he died painlessly because of his “righteousness” were two classical interpretations. As I’ve learned, there are other views of who and what Enoch might be.

In Judeo-Christian circles, he is considered the “scribe of judgement.” He’s considered the author of “The Book of Enoch,” an apocryphal work which was followed by the “Second Book of Enoch.” The Book of Enoch is considered by the Western Christian church as non-canonical, or non-inspired (a.k.a revealed) works. Some Orthodox sects see it as canonical, and most scholars of Judeo-christian literature find it of either historical or theological value. The Book of Enoch is considered to be, technically, five independent pieces of work, written between 300 B.C.E. and 100 C.E. The five independent pieces are seen as (with Wikipedia links):

The Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1–36)
The Book of Parables of Enoch (1 Enoch 37–71) (also called the Similitudes of Enoch)
The Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72–82) (also called the Book of the Heavenly Luminaries or Book of Luminaries)
The Book of Dream Visions (1 Enoch 83–90) (also called the Book of Dreams)
The Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 91–108)

These books talk about first the fall of the angels who were alleged to have fathered the Nephilim, as described in Genesis. The rest of the books are writings about Enoch’s revelations about and travels to heaven, either via visions or dreams. Some of the concepts discussed in these books are interesting and could have been controversial to the first Christian church leaders. The books contain histories of the fallen angels and their interaction with human kind, Enoch’s travels through what might be considered the underworld and heaven, a discussion about the Tree of Life, who the seven archangels were, parables on living, descriptions of heavenly bodies and their movements, and much more.

Fragments of The Book of Enoch can be found in other writings of the old and new testaments, other apocryphal works, and in the Quran. The Second Book of Enoch is also known as “The Secrets of Enoch,” and tells the story of how Enoch was transported to and through heavens, and further relates tales of the war of angels. There is a Third Book of Enoch which exists, and the Book of Giants, which is attributed to the same time period and relating to the same topics.

So, Enoch has a lot of interesting things going on with him, his life, and his afterlife; so much so that it has inspired many and decidedly different tangents to esoteric teachings. We know that Enoch, or Idris as he’s known in the Quran, was known to have been lifted up to heaven, as noted in the Christian Bible. The Quran contains two references to Idris; in Surah Al-Anbiya (The Prophets) verse number 85, and in Surah Maryam (Mary) verses 56-57:

(The Prophets, 21:85): “And the same blessing was bestowed upon Ismail and Idris and Zul-Kifl, because they all practiced fortitude.”
(Mary 19:56–57): “And remember Idris in the Book; he was indeed very truthful, a Prophet. And We lifted him to a lofty station”.

Some Jewish scholars think that Enoch became the head of the angelic host, Metatron. Edgar Caycee, a Christian fundamentalist and traveler to “the realms of the dead,” has a very elaborate reincarnation lineage of Jesus Christ, of which Enoch was one incarnation. To Caycee, Enoch was also Hermes (Thoth), the priest Joshua, and a few other incarnations. While this is interesting, we have not addressed the idea of “Enochian.” What is it?

Enter John Dee and Edward Kelley (a.k.a. Talbot). Much has been written about John Dee, and much of it dismissive. However, he was an extremely learned man with a fervent desire to heal the rifts between the Catholic Church, The Church of England, and the Protestant sects in mainland Europe. He was a devout man, and while we might understand how this can all work together, he was a scientist, alchemist, and occultist. In his desire to mend the religious wounds of the time, he sought to discover the original language, the language of God and Angels. In doing so, he felt that he could bring about the unification of humanity. Not being a medium or scryer himself, he turned to both his son, Arthur Dee, and eventually to Edward Kelley, a younger alchemist and spirit-medium. For eight tumultuous and energetic years, they worked together with Edward relating the Angelic language to John Dee through a series of seances and spirit conferences. Dee’s writings have been republished and in the web archives and by some publishing houses. Copies also exist in the British Library.

The language that Dee and Kelley uncovered or created (some debate exists, of course), was called by Dee the “Angelic” or “Adamic” language, as it was the supposed language that God used to create the universe, that Adam learned from God, and what Adam used to name all living things. The idea of an antediluvian, singular language was very popular at the time in the Western world, and seeking it was one of Dee’s highest priorities. He was a mathematician, philosopher, astronomer, cartographer, and navigator. Even though he is known more for his “magical” leanings, he was an extremely well educated man. He was also a follower of Neo-platonic ideals.

If one reads some of Dee’s journals or diaries of this work, one can see some of the occult influences that came into Freemasonry at a later time, and are evident in several Masonic rituals, especially in the English rites and Scottish Rite higher degrees. Elias Ashmole, who was the first to document the date of his speculative initiation, followed Kelley and Dee’s work closely. In fact, he reproduced some of Kelley’s documents and created a Biography of John Dee. Ashmole’s notation of his speculative initiation has undergone a fair amount of scrutiny, which will not be replicated here. He seemed to have an influence with many people who were swirling around the Speculative Masonic world. It’s hard to believe that someone of Ashmore’s experience in the sciences and esoteric studies could not have influenced an organization he was a member of for decades. He’s well known for having written “The Institution, Laws, and Ceremonies of the Order of the Garter” in 1672 as well as being a member of the Royal Society. The author in the book noted below that “Ashmole was a joiner,” and joining a society of Freemasons seemed to be the thing to do at this time in England. It’s somewhat apparent that as his time as a Freemason went on, he did exert further influence. An excellent book to read about this time period, and about John Dee, Kelley, and Ashmole is “The Golden Builders,” by Thomas Churton. It is a deeper historical account of these persons than can be given here.

Enochian Language I think we may safely say that John Dee and Edward Kelley put the “Enoch” in Enochian, which begs deeper insight into who Enoch was, and why he “went with God.” Another excellent book is “The Book of Enoch,” by Weiser Books, and author R.H. Charles. The most recent publication is 2003. We’ll close with this small excerpt from that book:

103:2 “I know a Mystery | And have read the heavenly tablets, | And have seen the holy books.

The Real Reason a Masonic Temple is Called a Lodge

October 7, 2018 By Majesty Montanez in Esotericism, History, Philosophy Tags: Ancient Egypt, Experts, Freemason, Freemasonry, Freemasons, God, Goddess, Great Architect, Holy Bible, I Corinthians 3:16, Lodge, Lovers of Wisdom, Mason, Masonic Temple, Masonry, Masons, Mother Nature, Philosophers, Philosophy, Symbol, Symbolism, Symbols, The Bible, Universal, Wisdom 2 Comments

Why is a Masonic Temple called a Lodge? This is a very good question; and the correct answer to this question is full of valuable wisdom that is of great and essential importance to Freemasons in particular, and to Philosophers in general. So, let us begin to unravel this mystery so that we can discover some of the useful life lessons that it has in store for us as Philosophers, or as lovers of wisdom.

All students of Freemasonry know that Freemasonry is of a symbolic nature, and that most of the foundational customs and symbols of Freemasons are derived from the work of the stone masons of ancient Egypt and other ancient countries. The universal masonic custom of referring to our temples or meeting places as “lodges” is an example of one of these foundational customs and symbols of Freemasonry that come from ancient stone masonry. Unfortunately, too many students of Freemasonry fail to realize that the soul or spirit of Freemasonry is essentially religious, philosophical, and spiritual. This causes these students to lack knowledge of the true and intended meaning of most of our masonic symbols, and to unknowingly give a false interpretation to not only our symbols, but to Freemasonry as a whole.

This is most often a result of the student limiting his studies to a trash heap of purposely misleading books and articles on the history and subject of Freemasonry that have been published by unqualified, overly pretentious, and overtly biased, self-proclaimed “authorities” on the subject.

However, this lack of a true understanding of Freemasonry is primarily due to the student making the costly mistake of overlooking the significance of the simple fact that the work of ancient stone masonry, which Freemasonry uses as an analogy or symbol of its own work and teachings, was centered around religion and philosophy, which is to say, the worship and study of Mother Nature, ourselves, and the divine.

As the old saying goes, “the true nature of a tree can be known by the kind of fruit it produces,” and the ancient stone masons (not to be confused with brick masons), who were of many different cultures, nationalities, and religions, were the builders and creators of all of the most important buildings of the ancient world, which were the temples and monuments dedicated to the Gods and Goddesses of ancient religion. By overlooking this aspect of the nature of the work of ancient stone masonry, the non-co-masonic student of Freemasonry usually misses the point that Freemasonry is likewise centered around God, the Supreme Architect of the Universe.

The religious, philosophical, and spiritual nature of Freemasonry is the reason as to why the meeting place of any group of Freemasons is called a temple, which is defined in everyday language as being a building devoted to the worship, or regarded as the house or dwelling place, of a God or Gods.

On the other hand, a masonic temple, as was already mentioned, is also called a lodge, and this is because ancient stone masons (who were literally travelers, or “traveling men” and “traveling women,” due to the nature of their work, which often required them to leave behind their families and homes for long 220px-Schwind_-_Sabina_von_Steinbach periods of time as they traveled from place to place and worked on various building projects all throughout the country) would always build several temporary houses, called “lodges”, near their work site, which they used as both shelters and workshops.

Although this obviously gives us the superficial reason for which we symbolically call our temples “lodges”, it would be very unwise of us to automatically conclude that this is the reason for this ancient universal custom in its entirety, since we know that Freemasonry is essentially philosophical and spiritual, and uses its symbols as its main method of teaching and expressing important life lessons that are based on timeless philosophical principles and truths. It is therefore very highly likely that the word lodge is a masonic symbol that indirectly expresses a very deep and fundamental lesson for us about the true nature of our existence.

Since the word lodge is synonymous with the word temple in the symbolic language of Freemasonry, we must logically conclude that they both symbolically refer to the human body as the “house” that God lives in. As is said in I Corinthians 3:16 of the Holy Bible, asabovesobelow which is another one of the many symbols of masonic philosophy and spirituality: Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the spirit of God lives in you?

By applying the masonic and hermetic principle of correspondence* (“As within, so without”), which is a universal law of Nature, to the human body, we discover that the human body can be symbolically and very accurately described as being a miniature replica of the Universe, or existence as an infinite whole. This lets us know that the masonic temple, or the masonic lodge, is a symbol of both the Universe and the human body; and this is very powerfully hinted at us in the symbolic description of the lodge in the ritual of Freemasonry’s first degree. Now that we know that the masonic lodge is symbolic of both the Universe and the human body, and that Freemasonry thereby likens or compares the Universe and the human body to a lodge of ancient stone masons, all that remains is for us to figure out why this is so.

Once again, a lodge, by common definition, is a temporary house or home, as opposed to a permanent house or home, which would make a lodge a very fitting symbol of the Universe, since the Universe is not only “the house and home of humanity,” but a temporary house and home for us, as we will not be living in this world forever. We will all, one day, die. But until then, we must continuously come together and unite as luxorskeletonschwallerdiagram Freemasons to do the work of Freemasonry (which is to evolve and perfect humanity) within the “lodge” or “workshop”, meaning within the Universe or world of everyday life. This is perhaps the most basic of all of the valuable life lessons that we are indirectly taught by the masonic lodge being a symbol of the Universe or the macrocosm (the “big Universe”).

When we look at the masonic lodge as being a symbol of the human body or the microcosm (the “little Universe”), we learn an equally valuable life lesson. In the same way that the Universe is a temporary house and home for humanity, so is the human body for the Spirit of God. And just as we must continuously come together and unite as Freemasons to do the work of Freemasonry within the workshop or lodge of the Universe collectively, so must we also do the work of Freemasonry on an equally constant basis individually, within the secret, inner lodge or workshop of ourselves as individuals, thereby achieving balance and harmony between the two opposite poles of selflessness and selfishness within us.

As we can now see, the use of the word lodge as a symbol of Freemasonry contains some very useful and valuable life lessons for us, indeed. So let us take heed. And let us continue to work both collectively and individually, but most important of all, unceasingly, toward the evolution and perfection of humanity.

For a deeper understanding of the masonic and hermetic principle of correspondence, which is mentioned in this article, and to help expand the Great Work of the Masonic Philosophical Society, purchase the book, The Kybalion.

Enlightenment

May 23, 2018 By Kristine Wilson-Slack in Esotericism, History Tags: Adam Smith, Baruch Spinoza, Buddha, Christ, Co-Freemasonry, Co-Masonry, Co-Masons, Deepak Chopra, Devotional, Einstein, Enlightenment, Freemasonry, Freemasons, God, Goethe, Intellectual, Kant, Knowledge, Masonry, Nature, Project Gutenberg, Rousseau, Science, Spinoza's Pantheism, The age of Enlightenment, Truth, Voltaire, Wisdom Leave a comment

On a recent post, some people were critical of the term “enlightenment” and its application toward the human race. Now, this term was being used in conjunction with the “Age of Enlightenment,” something altogether different from our modern American use of the term. Students of History understand, know, or at least have heard of the Western European “Age of Enlightenment,” so called because of the explosion of knowledge, science, and access to those tools that brought forward many of our modern inventions and way of thinking.

According to Websters, enlightenment is explained thus:

inˈlītnmənt/enˈlītnmənt/

noun

1. the action of enlightening or the state of being enlightened. “Robbie looked to me for enlightenment”; synonyms: insight, understanding, awareness, education, learning, knowledge.

2. a European intellectual movement of the late 17th and 18th centuries emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition. It was heavily influenced by 17th-century philosophers such as Descartes, Locke, and Newton, and its prominent exponents include Kant, Goethe, Voltaire, Rousseau, and Adam Smith.

Someone very wise once told me that Freemasons fall into two general “modes,” if you will, with regards to their approach to Freemasonry: intellectual and devotional. This is a wide spectrum; and, we all have elements of both within our personalities while some people will fall more towards one side than the other. It’s difficult for someone who leans more toward an intellectual bent to understand a devotional way of being, and vise versa. An intellectually-bent person might look at Freemasonry as a tool to intellectual discovery, a place for concrete fraternal relationships, and a more inward view of life. Analysis. A devotional-bent person may want to explore the esoteric and occult side of Freemasonry, feel more reverential toward their deity through their Masonic work, and perhaps be more inclined toward personal, service-oriented relationships. Feeling. Each person has to some degree these modes of operation. Yet, as a Freemason, they are perhaps brought visible.

Why does this matter when discussing enlightenment? It seems that each of these people view enlightenment in very different ways. Is knowledge derived from a pure scientific approach? Analysis? Is knowledge derived from a pure empirical approach? Feeling? The interesting thing is the judgement that goes along with how each other views the opposite approach. There’s an intellectual snide comment here or there when the devotional Freemason approaches enlightenment with an emotional response. There’s harsh condemnation of science when the intellectual produces a theory based on their analytical approach and disregards the “human” element. What is interesting is how each immediately judges the other’s approach to enlightenment, as if there is only one way. Even the non-religious discussion can evoke a dogmatic high-horse.

Is it so difficult to imagine that you can have both approaches, and both are valid?There’s also this “great quest” toward enlightenment, as if it’s something that can be achieved through one method, one voice, or one frame of mind. Some think that we can achieve enlightenment in a lifetime, like a Buddha or Christ. Some think that scientists could never achieve enlightenment, no matter how intelligent, because they have no “devotion.” Some think that only scientists could achieve enlightenment because they have “purer” processes. Some think that humans can achieve enlightenment one being at a time, and still others insist that it must be an all or nothing endeavor. I think enlightenment is far greater than the individual, and enlightenment isn’t something sparkly, pretty, easy, or fun. There’s no flash of sudden godhood nor individual ascension into the realms of all-knowing, having-no-use-of-bodies beings that will provide us some unknown fascinating wisdom. I don’t think that we get out of this corporeal manifestation anytime soon.

The idea of enlightenment, as in The Age of Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th C., is really about letting go of the shackles of tradition. It’s about embracing change and using knowledge to propel us, individuals and humanity, forward. Enlightenment isn’t everyone achieving godhood. It’s about all of us realizing that we are already in control, and have the tools inside of us to solve those problems. Deepak Chopra said, “I was an atheist until I realized that god was inside of me.” When asked about his religious views, Einstein replied:

“Your question is the most difficult in the world. It is not a question I can answer simply with yes or no. I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza’s Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.”

Is finding “God” enlightenment? Born just prior to the Age of Enlightenment, Baruch aristotle Spinoza laid the groundwork for radical thought (in 17th C Europe) regarding the existence and definition of God. Much like Mozart as the pinnacle of Baroque music, Spinoza was the pinnacle of Latin academic writings in rationalist philosophy. According to Spinoza, God is Nature, and Nature is God.

The fascinating thing about Spinoza is that he worked, day to day, as a lens grinder. His passion was philosophy, ethics, religion, and the question of the divine. He did not content himself with or define himself as his day-to-day paying job. He did not accept honors or rewards based on his writings and thought. He died young, at the age of 44, but seems to have accomplished a great deal for the human race in that short of a time. One can read Ethics and Spinoza’s other works at Project Gutenberg.

One would like to think this is true enlightened human being. Spinoza was an everyday man who engaged in deep thought, the search for Truth, and produced that Truth in service to Humanity. He propelled the next generation, and several after, to continue to explore and discover knowledge. He was an individual who kept the greater species in mind, literally. He was not concerned with some idea of heavenly admittance, some monetary gain, or some brilliance that only he could attain. This is someone who is on the path to enlightenment and bringing others along with him by virtue of sharing what he thought. It’s not purely the result of his work that causes him to be enlightened; it is the fact that he is bringing the entire species up to a level of awareness not previously found. He’s enlightened because of his humility and selflessness. Perfecting the human to perfect humanity.

The Age of Enlightenment did that as well; it brought different cultures to new heights of thought, awareness, and knowledge. As a species, it was a leap forward. Each leap of knowledge is usually obvious but not always grand. One cannot leap from the valley floor to the top of a mountain in one go. It also is visible in hindsight, rarely in the present. Enlightenment seems, to me, to be gently incremental. There are no five easy steps to enlightenment, no matter what anyone says. There is no golden knowledge at the end of all the degrees. Enlightenment is work. Hard work by many, many people. And…we can only bring humanity up if we work toward its good, bringing it all up with the talents and gifts that we have, be it a lens grinder or a philosopher.

And why not both? What is stopping us from pushing away from the TVs and video games and doing what Spinoza did? Nothing, as far as I can tell, except our own laziness. We are tempted by many things which bring down our humanity, or at the very least, stagnate and stall our progress. We need to be self-discovering, exploring ourselves, our environment, nature, our own natures, the universe, looking at things we know and don’t know, with both our natures – intellectual and devotional. Science and nature. Analytical and feeling. We might not find “enlightenment” at the bottom of a test tube but we may find wonder, delight, and wisdom on the journey. The results, of the destination and the journey, are the seeds of Enlightenment.

Sacred Lore

January 17, 2018 By Kristine Wilson-Slack in Literature, Theology Tags: Borges, Byron, Christianity, Co-Freemasonry, Co-Masonry, Co-Masons, Dogma, Encyclopedia Britannica, Ethics, Freemasonry, Freemasons, God, I-Ching, Mason, Masonry, Morality, Mulder, Quran, Sacred Lore, Sacred Texts, Sappho, Tao Te Ching, Truth, X-Files Leave a comment

What is Sacred Lore? These words are on the tongue of almost every Freemason, regardless of obedience, religion, creed, or geography. Yet, I have seen little depth into figuring out what they are, how they made their way into a Lodge and Freemasonry, what is their significance in Lodge. Many writers have spoken about these volumes, which may be termed sacred lore or sacred law. The inference there is that one is suggestive of stories and myths, while the other is orderly and a series of rules and codes by which to live. Here we really get into the difference between dogma, ethics, and morality. Does one need a book to be a moral person? Does one need religion? Does a Freemason need religion to be a true Freemason?

Some Freemasons think so, and others do not. Since its inception, Freemasonry has juggled a thin line between religion and morality. Not all Masonic Orders are the same, and there are wild variations about what is acceptable and what is not. Some Freemasons do not allow anyone who is not an avowed, church-going Christian. Catholics are discouraged, and in some cases forbidden, from becoming Freemasons. Some orders of Freemasons allow atheists, and still others don’t care what you believe in, as long as it is “something greater than yourself.” Religion and Freemasonry have struck a unwieldy dance through the ages and it does not promise to get any better any time soon.

Most Freemasonry groups have a requirement for a general belief in “god,” and study religious texts as they apply to overall morality and ethical behavior. These religious texts are, for the most part, guidelines on how one should live their life and are the generally accepted texts of most major religions. Taken in their “symbolic” form, they are meant to be an expression of the highest human civilization can achieve, for itself and the world it lives in. Whether you call them codes, rules, mores, or dogma, the end result is the same: guidelines for how to be a good human being in a world filled with other human beings and living creatures. We need to get along to survive as a species and these texts are there to provide us the guidelines. While not everyone needs a guideline, many do. Even if you do not feel like you personally need a guideline, it is probably a good idea to know how other people think, in order to get along and be a generally good citizen of the world.

In general, many people take these books to be “inspired by God,” although written by men. When one asks,”Is the Tao de Ching a sacred text?”, the answer is likely to be yes. Written by man, it is still generally to be an inspired text to assist with the building of a human race. Why? Why did a culture choose that particular text to venerate? Isn’t it likely that it could be anything? What about the I-Ching? Is that not a sacred text? Perhaps it is, perhaps not. There may be many answers to the “what makes something sacred” question and any of them may be correct. It may be that the leaders of specific religions are the authority on their related texts; yet, who is to say really what makes something sacred? Perhaps we just take their word for it and call them all sacred.

To be sacred means that it’s entitled to reverence or veneration. It’s set apart – a text, in this case, that is set apart from other texts. This implies that being inspired by divinity sets it apart. It has a different quality; it was written by someone to be venerated or exalted, for example, or it has a quality that we recognize as being special, valued, or important.

The controversial question is this: who are we humans to say what is divinely inspired and what is not? From those who have read widely, it may be clear that works by Shakespeare are something special. Were they not language-changing for English speakers? I do not believe we mere mortals can say that these works were not divinely inspired and yet, we would not call them sacred texts. We assume that a sacred text must belong to a religion. Yet, there is sublime poetry by Sappho, Byron, and Borges that touches the face of god and strikes directly to our hearts. Anything that creates an intense, life-changing emotion could be communication from the divine and perhaps we would do well to listen.

Encyclopedia Britannica states that “…their common attribute is that their words are regarded by the devout as sacred.” That is, the words that are on the page are to be revered by the devout. This does not mean that they are revered by all… except, perhaps, by Freemasons. Freemasons, in general, accept all of the world’s “sacred” texts as words to be studied.

Where a religion may view its own texts with reverence and exclusivity, Freemasons see the wisdom included across all of the world’s religions and venerate them all equally. Why? Because morality and ethical behavior are really the crux of what these texts are about. They teach humans how to live well with each other, how to live well with the world around them, and how to be able to not only help the human race continue to survive but to increase the positive influence in the world and promote the general welfare and progress of human society.

These texts, because of their sacredness, are also open to negative and destructive morality. Religion taken to the extreme, any religion, corrupts the message of something positive into something consumptive. This has been true throughout the history of the human race but even more so in the last two thousand years. The baser human nature twists the message and those who live in primal fear follow that message. There are many who view “sacred texts” of religions with disdain and hatred for the corruption they have sown. In all of this, its up to the human element to decide how the word will be interpreted – for the good of humanity or the destruction of it.

There is truth everywhere we look, depending on how deeply we look. One must take the time to explore to really learn and to experience to really learn. What is it that Mulder would say? The Truth is out there…

Read more Sacred Texts at sacred-texts.com. They have nearly every conceivable sacred text that one could ever want to study.

Is Freemasonry a Spiritual Practice?

November 22, 2017 By Kristine Wilson-Slack in Esotericism, Philosophy Tags: Albert Pike, Allah, Aristotle, Atheist, Catholic, Co-Freemasonry, Co-Masonry, Co-Masons, Esoteric, Exoteric, Freemason, Freemasonry, Freemasons, God, Goddess, Jehovah, Neoplatonists, Plato, Plotinus, Practice, Religion, Socrates, Soul, Spirit, Spiritual, Spirituality, Tao, The Great Law, Wiccan, Work of Masonry, Zeus 1 Comment

In keeping with the discussion surrounding soul and spirit, I wanted to complete the examination in a part 2, looking at Freemasonry as, to use the “new age” term, a spiritual practice. Freemasonry has been called many things in its lifetime: a fraternal group, an esoteric organization, a cult, a charity organization, and a religion, among other things. Whatever the masses call Freemasons or the Freemasons call themselves, their mission has been the same from the beginning: to create a better world starting with the improvement of humanity at the individual level.

“Remember always that all Masonry is work”, says Albert Pike, a prominent 19th Century Freemason. The Masonic “work,” in my view, is the internal, oblique ritualistic work by which Masons are made and educated for the exoteric work, which consists of activities for the welfare of mankind according to Masonic principles. It is in this mysterious, hidden ritualistic work where much of the speculation of what Freemasonry does and does not do begins. Indeed, sometimes Freemasons themselves may have a difficult time understanding what the “secret” things of Masonry are all about.

In at least one Masonic Order, and probably many others, it is specifically stated that Freemasons have a special charter to input esoteric knowledge into the Masonic members. By esoteric, let’s use the basic form of the word, meaning “knowledge meant only for a few.” Freemasonry, being a select organization, is “esoteric” in this way. That is, generally speaking, the percentage of the overall, human population that belongs to Freemasonry is extremely low. Esoteric, in its uncomplicated form, does not connote anything spiritual, religious, or occult. While some aspects of those forms of study may be “esoteric,” the word “esoteric” does not mean spiritual, religious, or occult.

AstralProjection3 Be that as it may, many people find that Freemasonry lends itself toward “spirituality.” “Spiritual” means, quite simply, “pertaining to spirit.” This begs the question, then: what is spirit?

To be simple and clear, for this I’ll use the dictionary.com definition, which is “the principle of conscious life; the vital principle in humans, animating the body or mediating between body and soul.” Could it mean “the soul as it is separated from the body at death” or even “an angel, demon; sprite?”

Yes, absolutely; however, when speaking in relation to philosophical discussions, the first definition is the one to which most people seem to refer. It is the one that for the purposes of this exposition that we will accept and use. The “principle of conscious life” or spirit, and its existence or non-existence, has been for all of human existence the core of much conflict.

What is spirit? Why do people, cultures, and religions view it differently? Is the spirit of humanity divine? Why is this so important? What about the spirit of animals, trees, and rocks? Whence does this spirit emanate? What is its birthplace? The source of many people’s idea of “spirit” seems to be either what many would call God, or gods and goddesses, and the qualities or virtues we assign them accordingly. If we are animated by this “spirit,” and we ascribe this to “God” and say that this part of our being has “godly attributes” or it is “divine.”

However, as is defined above, the term “spirit” is not demarcated by some kind of divine or godly source. It simply is an animation or “vital principle in humans.” It is when we ascribe this spirit’s existence to a specific external entity – be it God, Allah, the Tao, Jehovah, or Zeus – that we run into human conflict. If one is right and true, all others must be wrong and false. Wars have been and continue to be fought over such questions as the origin of “spirit.” Yet, do humans fight over “spirits,” or do they fight over “souls?”

This is where the subject of spirit becomes confused and perhaps convoluted; it is when the word “soul” is interchanged with “spirit.” Wars have been fought over “souls,” not “spirits.” When we discuss soul, I feel we must continue to be very clear about the terms that we’re using, and that the meaning of the word should be as neutral as possible.

“Soul” to a Catholic is very different than a “soul” to a Wiccan, Neo-Platonist, or an Atheist. Resorting to Merriam-Webster for common ground, and looking at this from a purely English literary and linguistic sense, both “soul” and “spirit” originate from a core meaning of “breath, life.”

The major difference between the two seems to be that one is immortal (soul) and one is pure animation and life (spirit) with a specific beginning and ending event. The idea, from these definitions, is that the soul lasts forever while the spirit comes into existence at birth and expires at the death of its human host.

In the base meaning of the word “soul,” there is also the inference of “life giving” qualities. Given that both concern themselves with the essence of life and seem to inhabit the same physical space, it is easy to see that these could be confused and muddled in discussion, debate, and theology. I hear many Freemasons refer to Spirit and Soul interchangeably, but I am unclear whether or not they mean the same thing or spiritual eye something different. I do believe that Freemasonry helps provide us a path toward an answer.

We do not normally say we perform a “soul practice”; what we are concerning ourselves here with is the idea of a spiritual practice, as most Westerners use the term. As a verb, to practice is to do something again and again until we’re better at it.

Interestingly, the word “practice” is not a noun – it is in all cases a verb. It is an active principle; as we’ve noted above, so too is Freemasonry. A spiritual practice, using the terms we’ve outlined here, would really indicate “to regularly or constantly work at bettering the vital principle of conscious life.” The term “spiritual practice” is something which we might say develops, by repeated efforts, that vital principle animating humans, “animating the body or mediating between body and soul.”

As the soul is the vital “breath” of humans, one must ask whence it comes, in order to understand if it can be developed. Yet, if this principle is just that, a principle, can it be “trained?” Is it not already perfect how it is? There have been many philosophers, Aristotle, Plato, Plotinus, and Socrates that have all debated this very question – the immortal and thus incorruptible nature of the “soul.” Can something which is, at its core, incorruptible and pure, be “trained?”

Again, if we examine the word soul, as a vital and immortal principle emanating from a divine source, then one must assume that it is something that is pure and pristine as it is. If the Divine is infallible, is not the soul then also infallible? However, if the spirit, being that conduit between or mediator of the body and soul, is truly a breath that can expire at death, then perhaps it is this part to which we are seeking refinement. It would be the washing away of the film of emotions and desires that cloud the conduit that would be the province of a spiritual practice. This is very clearly outlined in some allegorical journeys of English Rites, particularly the higher degrees. In truth, we see it in all allegorical journeys, and stages, that the Freemason takes throughout their entire Masonic career.

Perhaps, what we call a spiritual practice is something that is not to improve or better the spirit itself but to find a way to remind our bodily world of what spirit, and soul if one believes in this, really is. Perhaps it is not to develop the spirit or even a relationship to the spirit but to be conscious and aware of it, to be cognizant of what clouds, conceals, obstructs, or harms that clear pathway of information between body and soul.

If our Divine self, as the soul, is to speak in the material world, the spirit must be clear to enable this to happen. Perhaps this is the reason that Freemasonry does not concern itself with a single religion but with Religion as a whole; if one is to know there is a soul, then there must be a reason for its existence. Perhaps this is also the reason that one must have a belief in a divinity to even be a Freemason. Why would you want to improve Stone_Masons copy the channel between body and soul if you did not believe that one of these pieces did not exist?

To develop the spirit first means to remove those things which impair the conduit and support that which assist the spirit in its duties. This practice would not concern itself with the reason for the soul’s existence – only that it would be able to communicate clearly with the other members of the human world.

This is where Freemasonry interests itself, specifically. As we progress through the degrees, different stories and symbols speak to us; based on our experience, one may find resonance more in one than in the other. They bring forth ideas and discoveries that enhance the channel between body and soul; by bringing forth triggers which illustrate our own blockages, we can identify the reasons and clear the path.

Being self-aware is the first step. As we rise in Freemasonic degrees, the perception and understanding of what bars our way becomes more subtle and refined, and practice of clearing the way becomes more layered. Freemasonry teaches its adherents, with many varied messages and depths, how to clear and keep clear the conduit; it teaches us how to act according to “the Great Law” which permeates the idea of human existence.

One reason Freemasonry builds upon itself, in my opinion, is that you must be able to remove the common, grosser obstructions in communication before you can work on the subtleties. Yet, if we slip, we need to start again. Practice. Hence, the reason Freemasons consider themselves to “always be in the first degree.”

In addition, Freemasonry seems to concern itself with all aspects of the human being, refining and finessing as we progress deeper into its teachings. That is, it concerns itself with our mental, physical, and emotional well-being and actions. One must learn the fundamentals of the physical world, via ritual and memorization, before he navigates into the emotional world: subduing passions, for example. Then, only by understanding and mastering these worlds can he hope to achieve any sense of stability and growth in the realms of the mental.

Most, if not all of us, struggle at any one of these levels and have to pick ourselves up from a setback, working at their rough courser nature again and again. Is this not practice?

Perhaps, then, all of this work we do in all these degrees is the aspect of Freemasonry which seeks to refine the spirit. If one views the degrees as a spiral of life, then one can see the practice built into each of them, culminating in a birth/death. Not only does Freemasonry teach us how to improve the spirit it also tells us why.

Freemasonry does not ascribe a specific religious or theological source to the soul or the body or the spirit – it accredits the supreme & sovereign manifestation with the lessons of the degrees – a divine source. It assists us to understand how to let the unique symbols_masonic_collage message of our individual Divine sparks to be heard and enables us, through the lens of Freemasonry, to understand why it exists in the first place.

There are many ways to understand the soul; religions provide manifold reasons for its existence and purpose of being. While some religions also teach us through their ritual how to access the soul, they may or may not allow for the rich diversity of human culture and multifarious modes of understanding.

I believe, in their dogmatic and rudimentary way, they seek to remove the moral obstacles which block the spirit (conduit) from achieving its goal, which is the free flow of Divine essence from the soul to the expression within this physical, emotional, and mental realm called Earth. Where they might fall short is the lack of cultural messaging that seeks to embrace all, with different messaging tailored to the different human stories that arrive at their doorstep.

Freemasonry seems to provide support for not only a diversity of “soul origins” but also finds that middle-path, the neutral ground in order to develop that pathway that connects between the world we live in and that world in which the Divine resides. The repeated journeys of the degree system seek to teach us, in a variety of ways, what the blocks might be and how to remove them, in straightforward, non-confrontational, and non-segregated language.

Freemasonry allows us as individuals find our own path to the Voice of whatever Divinity speaks to us, and encourages us to express it as who we really are – without pretense, illusions, or corruption. The Work of Masonry is the Work on our self – repeated trials and approbations, developing, cleaning, clearing, and recognizing the path which connects the Divine Soul to our human host. In this way, to me, nothing else could be more spiritual.

Masonic Soul Food

November 8, 2017 By Kristine Wilson-Slack in Esotericism, Philosophy, Theology Tags: Abraham Hicks, Big Bang Theory, Cell, Co-Freemasonry, Co-Masons, Consciousness, Cyndi Dale, Energy, Freemasonry, Freemasons, God, Mason, Masonry, Mitochondria, Neal Peart, Neoplatonists, Neurotransmitters, Philosophers, Plato, Plotinus, Psyche, Religion, Science, Socrates, Soul, Spirit, Tao, The Subtle Body Leave a comment

“What is a Soul? What is Spirit? What is Energy?” We begin to engage in conversations about such esoteric terms as soul, energy, and spirit without being cognizant that we are not speaking the same language. The words may be the same but meanings span the spectrum. We can debate these questions all night, all month, and for the rest of our lives and never come to understanding. Do people really know what they mean when they talk about energy, soul, or spirit? While these are common discussions amongst Freemasons, they are sometimes the most difficult subjects on which to remain impartial and fair.

Humans seem to have a lot invested in the idea of their souls, and in other people’s souls, too.

Many people join Masonic groups so they can “have an energetic experience” or “touch something mystical.” Some talk about experiencing something that touches their soul or provides a spiritual meaning to their lives. Some Freemasons mention how they “love the energy of Lodge” or how it’s our job to “raise the vibration of our material world and send out ‘healing’ energy.” Many people start their Freemasonic career looking for something mystical, something secret that only they have learned, that no one else knows, that provides them a conduit to perhaps special insight that no one else has. Because Freemasonry deals with the questions of life and death, the neophyte may be looking for Freemasonry to unlock all those special secrets and have the answers. They use terms like soul, spirit, and energy without defining them for themselves and in their communications with others.

energy1 It seems that many times, the conversations are about what people want to believe rather than reasoned conclusions. Discussion and debate are the way we educate ourselves and grow. Transformation requires thought.

To those who let go of preconceived desires and wishes, Freemasonry is transformative in many ways. It does discuss these questions of life and death. It leaves the aspirant to mull over symbols and meaning and yes, come up with personal insights on perhaps souls and spirit and energy. Freemasonry provides us the opportunity to to convert from a polarizing human nature to one of balance. We need to learn to deal with all aspects of our temperament in order to understand all the features of this life – material, emotional, mental, and spiritual. It is this last realm, spiritual, that trips many up.

Most Freemasons accept the presence of a greater power, something undefined that connects us all to a single purpose. Most would agree with the idea of the multi-faceted nature of human existence, struggling with the balance of brain, mind, body, and this idea of “connectedness.” Many have experienced things they can’t explain, the nudges of intuition, and the sudden flashes of insight that seem “deep.” These are all valid experiences. It’s taking them from the experience to meaningful communication that humans struggle. We throw out a word like “soul” or “spirit” or “energy” and assume that the people we communicate with understand what they mean. Freemasons are philosophers, and any good philosopher will not abide a discussion with random, undefined terms. When asked about souls, there are vague allusions to something energetic, mystical, unique, and connected to some form of god/goddess/force/Tao. A soul is what makes us individuals. A soul is something that is part of God. A soul is our energetic self. “When our eyes met, our souls touched.”

What does any of that really mean? For each individual who speaks on these subjects, there is a different answer. Pinning people down about souls and spirits and such can be quite agitating for people. Some people get downright angry.

Can we define any of it? Perhaps. Perhaps we can start with energy.

socrates Unless you wholeheartedly dismiss science, there can be no doubt for one second that we are energetic beings. Neurons use electrical impulses and neurotransmitters (chemicals) to enable our bodies to function in its entirety: to think, feel, heal, sense, breath – everything. Without energy, our hearts would not pump, we would cease to be able to think and process information, and we would die. Mitochondria, in a weird symbiotic relationship with us, enable us to live by helping us process the material world around us into energy. Every cell has mitochondria and every cell is able to produce energy of some sort. Life is energy.

Okay, we’ve established we’re energetic beings, and by the nature of the material world, energetic beings are everywhere. We communicate with our senses and receive communication with our senses. Abraham Hicks said, “We talk with words but communicate with energy.” Cyndi Dale, author of “The Subtle Body: An Encyclopedia of your Energetic Body,” states that “energy is information that vibrates.” This latter definition is a little more trustworthy, it seems, than the former. We can test it. We can retest it. We can play with it and work to define examples. However, this is also where it gets tricky, right? Let’s take a page, well, a short paragraph from Wikipedia: “In physics, energy is the property that must be transferred to an object in order to perform work on or heat the object. It can be converted in form but not created or destroyed.”

BB_timeline Well, okay then, simple question: where did the energy that makes up us come from? Ouch, right? In a recent conversation, I posited this question to a fellow Freemason. He answered, “the stars.” I said okay, get me from B to A. He said “Stars created the elements that trapped the energy that went into making us.” I replied that I agreed, but then, what makes up the stars? He said it must be “the Big Bang.” Humans are the trapped energy of the material created during the Big Bang. To him, we all derive from the single moment that created time, matter, and energy. Physicist or philosopher, the topic of energy is where we converge. We can conclude from this that elements that make up the material world are trapped energy. Is this trapped “energy” spirit? Is that our “soul?”

If we are trapped energy of stars, as is everything around us, then we have far more in common with other matter than we think we do. If we are all made of the same matter, we should be able to recognize one another by way of transferring energy. Or, so one would think. What is interesting to note is that many psychologists and philosophers considered love to be a transference of energy. Freud dwelt on the physical aspects of love while Plato talks about spiritual or unselfish love; but one in the same, what we call love is, to them, a transference of energy. When we love something, we do put energy into it, and it into us. Perhaps this is the idea of spirit. Spirit, Plato said, that that way we communicate emotionally with other humans. Is this not love? So, love is spirit. We can also say love is energy.

So if love, life, and elements are all energy, can we draw any conclusions about the soul?

Many philosophers have tried to explain ‘soul.’ Just one example, Plotinus, the first Neo-Platonist, did his best to help us along in understanding that the soul doesn’t necessarily need a body; yet, without a body, it can’t exist in the “intelligible realms and express itself in the visible realms.” This concept tells us how he thought the soul expressed itself, but not what it is. In a very basic sense, Neoplatonists call the soul “consciousness” or “psyche.” Still, it’s unclear even in modern terms what consciousness is. If we thought defining “soul” in religion is difficult, try the philosophical bent…Truly angst-ridden. It seems that Plotinus and Plato are already agreed that there is a soul, even if they can’t agree on its definition. Maybe it’s something that we all have to debate on until we get to learn for sure. Maybe we’ll never learn for sure, at least not in this world. galaxy-wallpaper-preview-4

One solid conclusion is that the meaning of a soul does not seem to be the meaning of a soul for everyone, and spirit is not something we can agree upon, either. If nothing else, the myriad world religions would illustrate that. The phrase “our souls speak to each other” doesn’t mean much if you can’t really explain to someone else what it means. “We communicated ‘energetically’ is really worthless unless you can really understand clearly what you intend. It doesn’t even matter if you can explain it to someone else; do we even understand ourselves? A wise Freemason once said that if you can explain something to a five-year-old, and the five-year-old gets it, then you really understand the concept of it. Simple terms, clearly defined, done. We definitely need more five-year-olds around us to keep us honest and clear.

Freemason, scientist, philosopher, or physicist: regardless of what you believe about soul, spirit, energy, or anything else esoteric, definitions are important and personal understanding moreso. The exploration of life’s meaning is, whether we agree on terms or not, something we all share.

“Why are we here? Because we’re here. Roll the bones.” – Neal Peart

Metaphor: The Language of the Mystics

August 30, 2017 By Pamela McDown in Art & Music, Esotericism, Literature, Philosophy, Theology Tags: Apollo 14 Mission, Buddhism, Buddhists, Christianity, Christians, Co-Freemasonry, Co-Masonry, Earth, Edgar Mitchell, Freemasonry, Freemasons, God, Illusion, Intellect, Jesus, Julian Jaynes, Masonic, Masonry, Masons, Maya, Metaphor, Mysticism, Mystics, Owen Barfield, Romeo and Juliet, Rumi, Shakespeare, Soul, St. Teresa of Avila, Sufi, The Interior Castle, Universe, William Blake Leave a comment

In the outskirts of every society, you will find the mystics. Some are holy men in monasteries; some are Buddhists seeking enlightenment; some are public figures; some are Christians serving Jesus; some are Freemasons, like myself. Mystics have an amazing amount in common despite all that. They are not satisfied with what they learn in books, with ceremonies passed on for the sake of tradition, or with faith that comes from an assertion that “You really ought to believe in this.” What they want, instead, is conviction— the kind of conviction that comes only from a direct spiritual experience. Many say they have found it.

How do mystic seers convey their experience in words, or in stories? Our ancestors’ answer was: with tons and tons of different images – with metaphors, that is. Metaphors, after all, are symbols used to creatively describe a deeper reality, to give a sense of the color and taste of it. There are many metaphors in the teachings of Freemasonry.

How significant, then, is the relationship between mysticism and metaphor?

There are hundreds, maybe thousands or millions of metaphors in existence about mystical things. Rumi, the great Sufi poet, once said that God created everything in the outer world to serve as a metaphor for the inner. The outside world contains objects that can awaken and remind us of truths that, when applied, can be of real benefit. For example, if you read mystic literature about the soul, you might find the soul as ladder, the soul as garden, the soul as mountain, the soul as ark, the soul as mansion or castle, the soul as shining, living stone or even precious jewel, and so on. There are equally as many metaphors about the path to enlightenment.

34382722213_6e1d57324f_z A metaphor is a comparison. A metaphor establishes a relationship at once; it leaves more to the imagination. It is a shortcut to the meaning; it sets two unlike things side by side and makes us see the likeness between them. A metaphor is a comparison that doesn’t use the words “like” or “as,” while a simile is one that does use those words.

Why do metaphors in the writings of the mystics even matter? As the great consciousness-researchers Julian Jaynes and Owen Barfield both explained in their writings, it is very difficult to discuss consciousness except through metaphor. Metaphors create new ways of thinking, new realities, and new worlds.

Do metaphors shape the way we think? Let us look at an example.

Juliet is the Sun
From Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet is the metaphor, “Juliet is the sun.”

This statement equates two different things: one human, the other sidereal. Juliet is a human; the sun is a star. How do they get to be equal?

For the purpose of illustration, I will show how a metaphor is born, logically. We could say:

There is a human called Juliet.
There is a star called the Sun.
The human called Juliet is radiant.
The star called the Sun is radiant.
Therefore, the human called Juliet is like a star, called the Sun (because of the radiance).

Not very thrilling or poetic, is it? How can we make it more exciting? How is the metaphor created? First, we delete all the unnecessary words and steps, only leaving the simile “Juliet is like the Sun.” The final deletion comes about by eliminating the word, “like.” Voila! “Juliet is the Sun.” 34382660583_c940b54102_z

As we can see, this metaphor comes alive through deletion and transformation. Keep taking away words until something “becomes” something else. Keep stripping away the Maya and the illusion until we arrive at the truth: the direct perception or the mystical experience.

In the words of William Blake, “If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to a man as it is, infinite.”

If you have ever had an “aha” moment, there is something wonderfully joyous about experiencing the mystical – to remember that we have spiritual faculties in us open to the dimensions beyond. Wonder. Awe. The metaphorical language of the mystics points us to the stars – bridging earth to heaven and to a world beyond itself.

But how do we react when we encounter something that exists outside of our realm of study? Does everything have to fit into what is already known, otherwise it doesn’t exist? The experience of the Transcendent seems to defy expression.

One of the greatest mystical saints of all times, St. Teresa of Avila, says that the intellect cannot go with her to the higher realms. It must stay behind. She writes in her book The Interior Castle: “One should let the intellect go and surrender oneself into the arms of love, for His Majesty will teach the soul what it must do at that point.”

I do believe the central role of metaphor in shaping consciousness can be impactful in someone’s life. I also believe the intellect is not always our ally. 35192178685_29b4993ed4_z

Such was the case with Edgar Mitchell, astronaut on the Apollo 14 mission. On his return trip from the moon, he stared out of the window at our blue planet, Earth. At that moment something profound hit him. All of a sudden he was lifted out of his normal consciousness and felt an intense oneness with planet Earth and the universe. In a flash of higher consciousness a higher truth was revealed to him that dramatically changed his intellectual perspective. (Watch Edgar Mitchell’s “We Are One” video)

How lovely to live in possibility, to think in beautiful metaphors, to cherish the precious jewel in each sacred word, and to overflow with sweeping amazement. Your turn. What mystical metaphor would you want to leave behind as a jewel to humanity?

Note: Featured images are from the Art Exhibition, Beyond the Stars; The Mystical Landscapes from Monet to Kandinsky.

MASONIC PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY

Seeking to recapture the spirit of the Renaissance.

Tag Archives: God