Mythologos

Understanding dreams

 Most people I talk to about dreams feel that they mean something, and that it might be good to  understand them, but are not sufficiently interested to seriously explore their dreams. Which is a pity, because the surface of a dream - what you remember - is only a thin layer of images, events and characters that have a lot more to tell than you think.

 

 Image by Richard Dadd, late 1800's, who spent forty years in mental institutions, during which he continued to paint. Many of his works were of his dreams.

 

Dreams were considered very pertinent in ancient times, and in many indigenous cultures, they are attended to very closely as sources of direction, information and spiritual guidance. But aside from Freudians and Jungians, or readers of Robert Moss's popular books on the dreaming, most of us know nothing about the history of western studies of dreaming, and because we rarely come across any recent discussions on the subject, we don't think that dreams are really that important.. . .

Yet we spend a good portion of our life dreaming. Don't you wonder why our minds invest so much time and energy into something that has no value? It seems to me perverse, if not downright schizophrenic that despite a rich history of investigation, theorizing and discussion of dreams by some highly credible and respected sources, dreams are generally treated in the west as little more than trash bins or possible indications of mental illness.

The truth is that a surprising number of esteemed scientists, mathematicians and physicians, creative artists, musicians and writers have attributed some of their most significant ideas to dreams, and dreams have also initiated some historically significant events.

Most of the following information can be found in the books by dream researchers, Robert Moss and Robert Van de Castle, wonderful reads, both. 

 

The tablet of Gilgamesh, the mythic Mesopotamian king who sought to overcome death. His two significant dreams are told here.

 

From abundant references to dreams, dream interpretation and decisions based on dreams in ancient texts from across the world, we know that there have always been those who delved deeply into the nature of dreams, and some even attempt to codify dream symbols. 

 In ancient Greece, Artemidorus of Daldis wrote the multi-volume treatise Oneirocritica based on an extensive record of dreams. For sheer breadth of detail, analysis, and classification of dreams and dream symbols, this book could well be called  "the great-grandfather of all dream books". Although Artemidorus drew some fairly rigid and overly literal conclusions about dream symbols (for example, that animals always represent enemies), his theory of dreams and methods of dream analysis were in some ways very sophisticated. Not only are dream events and characters keys to its meaning, but “Every detail of the dream, and how the dreamer felt about each detail, should be ascertained. The internal structure of the dream also must be evaluated”.

Others were particularly interested in what part of the dreamer dreamed. Clearly, dreams are often irrational, so it could not be the rational mind that dreamed.  In The Republic, the Greek philosopher Plato, sounding very much like Freud speaking of the subconscious with its repressed content, wrote:

"In all of us, even in good men, there is a lawless wild beast nature which peers out in sleep”. In other words “since reasoning ability was suspended during sleep, the passions of desire and anger could reveal themselves with full force”.

Not only the dark aspects but all aspects of the psyche can speak to us through dreams, wrote Karl Schemer his 1861 book, Das Leben des Traumes. “The images [of the dream] throw off all the shackles of the ego so that the activity of the soul which we call phantasy is free from all the rules of reason and is also free from all restrictive factors, and thus rises to unlimited heights”.

(photo by Tatiana Wright)

 

Dreams can also offer invaluable guidance. The dreams of former slave, Harriet Tubman, helped save the lives of hundreds of slaves escaping via her “Underground Railroad” of safe havens, pointing out safe pathways so that despite pursuit by posses of slave hunters, Tubman “never lost a single ‘passenger’”. Gandhi’s non-violent mass strikes of 1919 which eventually led to the end of British rule in India were inspired by a dream.

And more recently, Lyndon B. Johnson’s decision not to seek another term was also triggered by a dream in which he found himself caught in a river unable to reach either shore. That dream and that decision to not run again could be seen as the catalyst that finally got us out of the bloody Vietnam war.

Some of the most interesting and informed insights into dreams appeared in Hervey de Saint-Denys’  Les reves et les mayens de les diriger, published anonymously in 1867. Based on his recorded dreams since age thirteen, Saint-Denys explained that dreams had their own logic that was grounded on certain distinguishable features, one being that “The moving panorama of our visions corresponds exactly with the train of ideas arising in our mind". In other words, what seem like a sequence of random images actually represents the flow of the dreamer’s thoughts.

Dream images may be abstractions, generalisations that creatively relate two seemingly different images. “A statue, for example, could become a living person . . .  a closely packed crowd with heads turned toward some spectacle" could become transformed "into a field full of daisies, and then into a huge mosaic scattered with regularly spaced medallions". 

 Abstractions can also be based on “resemblances between words" or on a purely abstract concept such as inequality. In one dream Saint-Denys dreamed that different breeds of horses were assigned different kinds of work according to the horse’s perceived value, and then dreamed of water pipes of different length. Represented here was the abstract idea of inequality, transferred from dream to dream in totally different images.

Something that I have experienced myself is that dreams may  be shared.  In Sleep: Its Physiology, Pathology, Hygiene and Psychology (1897), Russian physician Marie de Manaceine tells of an event where several hundred soldiers sleeping in an abbey awoke on three consecutive nights in terror from the same nightmare of a big black, long-haired dog.

Of such “collective dreams” she wrote, “not only are the bounds of personal consciousness extended vaguely in sleep so as to cover all the past life of the sleeper. It is even possible to hold that the consciousness of the species, and even its predecessors, may be represented in the psychic organism and reappear in sleep”.

My own experience with shared dreams concerned my children. When my daughters were small, I would get a glimpse or sign within my own dream if they were having particularly bad nightmares, and could waken up to go soothe them. One time, my youngest, then in her early teens, told me she had dreamed of falling down a cliff, but had saved herself when I suddenly appeared and told her to dream of branches to hold onto.  I was surprised, as I had also dreamed that night that she was falling and I told her what to do. (I do not recall ever getting into my son's dreams though).

And just recently, I read an article saying that "Studies Prove That Humans Can Communicate With Each Other While Dreaming" (conscious reminder.com)

(image from consciousreminder.com)

Clearly, there is much to be yet understood about dreams, and it could be that since dreams are so personal, and dream symbols can carry so many different meanings for us, there will never be a definitive explanation for and of dreams, but then again, the scientific method cannot yet explain consciousness or how we think, or even why a cell functions as it does, just that it does. On the really big things in life - who we are, what we are, how we should live and our life purpose - science can only guess; it is up to us individually to find the answers we seek.

I believe that dreams are one source of answers, and that if we learn to read them (which, I admit, takes some time and effort), we will find many of those answers already within. And if you do undertake such investigations, you can be assured of broad shoulders to stand upon.

To get you started, may I recommend Van de Castle's, Our Dreaming Mind. This book has so much fascinating information on dreams, dream history, and approaches to dreamwork that even if you  just dip in here and there, you'll bring up gems. Its out of publication, but I bought my second-hand copy from World of Books in Australia.

And to gain a much deeper understanding of your own dreams, and how to interpret them,  I highly recommend the course offered online by Atlantic University in Virginia. 

Their 12 week Dream Interpretation Teacher Training course begins July 8, 2019.

 

 

 

 

 

Van de Castle, R. ( 1994) Our Dreaming Mind. New York: Ballantine Books. Highly recommended!!

 

Survival by Cooperation

‘A hundred times every day I remind myself that my inner and outer life depend on the labors of other men, living and dead, and that I must exert myself in order to give in the same measure as I have received and am still receiving.’   (Albert Einstein)

‘He that does good to another does good also to himself.’     (Seneca, 4 BC-65 AD)

 Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness, consideration and cooperation can finally lead men to the dawn of eternal peace.’  (Dwight D Eisenhower)

 ‘Do not waste time bothering whether you "love" your neighbor; act as if you did.’   (C.S. Lewis)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

While Darwin often described intense competitiveness in nature, he also noted its cooperativeness. If plants and animals were more competitive than cooperative, he observed, most of their energy would be used up on aggression and self defence, which would make a species' chances of survival very thin indeed.

Nature is fundamentally cooperative.

Yes, animals might prey on others, compete for females of  territory, but nature is replete with examples of cooperation between animals, between species, and between different kinds of life forms. Mutual interdependence and cooperation are not rare in nature; they are abundant. And despite all that is wrong with this world, examples of cooperation and concern for the common good are also plentiful among human beings.

Cooperation has always been essential to human survival, and still is.

Forget about so-called 'selfish genes', humanity’s so-called 'intrinsic' selfishness and other justifications of human bad behaviour. Ignore the conflict-hungry media and problem-making academics and pay attention to your daily experience, for there you will see day after day, human beings helping each other, caring for each other, cooperating to reach common goals, being kind to strangers, building mutually supportive relationships where each person's needs and wants are important.  Observe people all over the world cooperating for the greater good, helping, sharing what they can to achieve goals for the benefit of all.

This, my friend, is Us, if we make it so.

Nature gives to us freely; we are nurtured by the cosmos: the same universal energy, the same life force, the same divine spirit sustains us all. We can either work with it or go against it to our doom.

 

Book of Ashes - Poem

In my late twenties, I burned several books of poems after they caused a massive argument with my then-husband, who did not understand that the 'beloved' I wrote to was my own soul or God. I set fire to them in the kitchen sink. Last year, in a contemplative mood, I burned another book of poems for different reasons ... my new book of ashes ... 

 

Book of Ashes, 2018

Words on fire

melting into carbon

years of smothered doubts

terrors ...  intolerable perplexities

burning into ash

big thoughts unplumbed

love withheld

longings too deep to

be satisfied in this life 

perhaps not

in the next

 

Wrongs done 

terrible in their

mindlessness

pages on pages of regret

for awakenings refused

doors opened then shut

kindnesses not given

love spilled like seed

on stone ground

quietly weeping

 

Had I dared to

show my heart without

disguise

without the camouflage of 

laughter

let it burst as it yearned 

into flame

would I really have

drowned in tenderness -

lost that little tight thing

I called myself -

fallen like a featherless

sparrow too soon too far?

Would I really have

burned to ashes?

 

Or might I

- despite dire warnings

from the inner cloud -

might I

in the powerful surges of

life unchecked 

love freely given

everywhere

have been protected 

in the conflagration 

 

And might that 

hard little nut of I

have emerged 

from the ashes

burned into 

something free

something Radiant.

 

Infinite Self - Poem

View from the Treetops

(written in 1982)

Oh, friend, if I could tell you 

what I learned today!

That what we know 

is a fragment of our existence

a corpuscle of consciousness

focused so intently

on the book of this small life 

that we do not feel, not see

that like birds unfettered

we fly out in all directions

carried on the elemental energies of Being

into many worlds each as real 

unlimited

indomitable in our quest for self-knowing. 

 

And those dreams over which heart aches

for which we weep endless tears

of longing

They are all within the reach

of our greater selves.

Not today, perhaps, or tomorrow

in our tight constraints of time

will they be ours

for we have according to our reckoning

millions of years

past present and future

in which all the dreams

we can conceive

each facet of our restless souls

all tones of our grandest emotions

can be fulfilled.

 

If only I could share with you

this moment

of knowing

From the thin branches 

where I leaped and revelled

in the treetop breezes

I saw the me I know 

small and lost on the ground

blind to swirling of 

inexorable forces of creativity, possibility

captured in this creature

out of touch with the 

magnificence

of her Being.

 

And I sang joy

among the leaves

songs of belonging, of love, of safety

Why, from here, I said

I can fly

unconfined, unleashed, 

insanely rapturous

My thoughts

imagination

feelings

the wings with which I fly

Free

 

All of life shines 

from the eyes of each one

Time is all of a piece

Space a moment of concentration within

the full emptiness of infinity

All that remained un done

in one fantasy

fulfilled in another

All existences in

the loving embrace of

the infinite web from which

the mote of the moment

draws unwitting upon

its eternal selfhood

 

As one leaf contains 

the tree within its genomes

yet cannot express the fullness 

of the tree

one small life

cannot contain the 

myriad sparkling aspects

of self

can never know 

or express

it all. 

Letting Spirits Talk through You

I was fortunate, I think, to have grown up in a family that believed in the existence of spirit realms that could sometimes, and without our knowing it, often did communicate with or through us. But my experience with spirits began much earlier, before these parental influences. Put into an orphanage at around 3 or 4 years old (as part of Australia's refugee policy at that time), I often felt presences around me, or heard them, and found some of them very comforting. At first, I thought they might be fairies; later, nature spirits, but most were simply presences with whom I carried our mental conversations or who might just sit with me at times of distress.

image from wattpad.org

 

These spirits never talked through me, but I felt their influence. Of course, a great many of these communications occurred in my dreams. I learned very early in life that we often speak with spirits in our dreams.

Years later, I discovered that my parents knew about spirits, and would now and then attempt to communicate with them. When I was about twelve, they held a seance that I was allowed to attend. 

Overall, my experience of spirits has been mostly positive, and often beneficial. There have been incidents where I have not felt safe, where I felt an energy trying to enter, which I would never permit.

I found that as Seth, the spirit who communicated for over a decade through Jane Roberts, said, the integrity of the soul cannot the violated unless we allow it to be, unless we cause our energies to resonate at lower levels, or leave ourselves open to violation by 'abandoning', as it were, ourselves through, for instance, drunkenness, getting high or otherwise losing conscious control. 

In a way, making oneself a channel for spirit communications can be like allowing oneself to be possessed, which can be either a positive or negative experience. The spirit takes control of the body, voice and the conscious mind. I think that is what happened with Seth and Jane Roberts, for observers noted significant changes in Jane's voice, mannerisms, expressions and body when Seth spoke through her.

The extensively tested British medium, Leslie Flint, allowed spirits to speak through him via a kind of plasmic substance, but was, I think, conscious at the time. The famous American psychic (for want of a better descriptor), Edgar Cayce, was not possessed by his spirit sources but psychically left his body to gather the required information. Occasionally, a spirit (or angel) spoke directly through him, but generally, no possession was involved.

Spiritualists do recognise the veracity of possession, often by discarnate souls with unfinished business who try to possess or torment living family members or former acquaintance.

Spiritualist mediums may hold healing sessions for such spirits, inviting them into the sessions so that they can be spoken to and hopefully encouraged to be healed of their anger, resentment, or co-dependency on some living person.

Thought they can have very different connotations, possession and channelling are not always as different as they might seem. In both cases, the experiencer can be taken over and used by another personality such as a spirit of the dead, a celestial being that has never been carnate, an evil or ill-intentioned entity, or perhaps a higher aspect of Self.

What does distinguish these two kinds of experiences, is, I think, the involvement of, or lack of free will. While entities can spontaneously come through a person, the channeller permits or accepts this temporary ‘intrusion.' It is not, as far as I can tell from my own readings, ever forced, and a channeller must willingly put aside the personality self to allow the other entity to come through.

With possession, the alien entity temporarily takes up residence in the person, and controls their behaviour, often causing the person great distress. Where possession is involuntary, Jung believed that the possessing entity is an aspect of the person’s own psyche, noting that such psychic manifestations “can assume a completely autonomous function” (Groff, pg. 94). It has been suggested that even the most unique, profound and unexpected information to come through channels like Edgar Cayce and Jane Roberts might actually come from the higher levels of their psyche, such as Jung’s superconscious.

Perhaps in some cases, though that is not how those individuals or other mediums perceive it. Nor does Jung's explanation explain channelled spirits of the dead  like the long-deceased philosopher-psychologist William James who ‘came through’ Jane Roberts seeking to dictate a book about his after-death insights (Roberts, ). For me, accepting that spirits of the dead, even celestial beings that have never been incarnate, can and do communicate with us (some of which communications have been recorded) (Macy Afterlife; World ITC) is no harder than accepting that some possessions are most likely by otherwise unexpressed aspects of one's own psyche. I suspect that a great many cases of possession or harmful poltergeists are unconsciously self-generated.

Let us not ignore the potential for harm in communicating with spirits.  

One of the dangers of psychic development, I think, is that when we open our psychic channels, we may not know what we are opening them to. What seems to be involved is the attraction of resonating energies. How do we know that our frequencies are of a kind that will attract positive, uplifting or enlightening experiences? In developing our psychic abilities, do we know to what we are opening the doors of our psyches?

Most people who talk to me about channeling or communicating with spirits don't seem to want to ask these questions, but it is a concern that has made me approach psychic development with great care. Being dead does not automatically make an entity wiser or better than he or she was when living, after all. And many spirits who want to communicate with us have not gotten past the lower levels of the next world.

This is what the great spiritual teachers tried to teach us, to seek guidance from the highest sources, which means to make ourselves able to receive higher frequencies. The main reason for the spiritual principle of self purification, I suspect, is to prepare ourselves adequately to receive messages, inspiration and guidance from wise and good sources. Purification is a critical first stage, and perhaps the most difficult, for it can mean bringing to the surface all that is within us, deep within our psyches that is disturbed, doubtful, chaotic, fearful, ego-centric, selfish, fearful and so on, so that we can clear it away.

 

In several readings, Cayce advised making oneself a fit habitation for God. I think that is what he meant, that if we want to attract what is good and true, we must clear away all that prevents it. That process is not easy. It can be, in fact, earth-shakingly traumatic, especially if we are pushed into spiritual crisis. Then, it can indeed feel as if some other power is in control, and we can only hope that we will emerge intact.

 

Which is why my strong advice for anyone seeking to be a channel of God's love, or for wise spirits is - First cleanse your mind, body and spirit. Clear the way.

 

Image: Nzkat Creative Movement on facebook

 

Image: Edgar Cayce from EdgarCayce.org

Groff, C., Groff, S. (1992). The Stormy Search for the Self. Calif., L.A.: Tarcher

Macy Afterlife: the Beacon. Accessed online at  http://macyafterlife.com/

Roberts, J. (1978). The Afterdeath Journal of an American Philosopher; The View of William James. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

World ITC.  Accessed online at http://www.worlditc.org/

Why I read stories

Old woman reading, Rembrandt.

 

Mid-page in Doris Lessing's novel, Mara and Dann, "an adventure" about two children surviving and growing in some future time of radical climate change, halfway through a non-eventful sentence, I was suddenly struck by the soul-nourishing, transformative power of stories. I almost wept with gratitude.

And gazing outside the window-doors onto the back yard, it seemed to me at that moment of a different world. The morning sunlight streaming from the west through the branches, the noises of birds, a magpie picking bits of nest material from a hanging planter, leaves each pulsing with their unique vibrations ... all alive, a marvellously multi-valenced orchestra of sound, sight and light for my delight.

This is what stories can do for me. They open my inner gates of perception so wide that for those moments, I can experience reality as it is, glorious, vivid, truly alive, profusely generous, infinite potentiality in continual creation.

Stories have always been a crucial part of my life. Had I not immersed myself from the moment I could read in stories; had I not thought about my life, experienced it as stories; swum like an otter in an endless stream of stories from which I drank with unquenchable thirst, who would I have become? Not this Me. Not this self that feels so inexorably part of all humankind, a tiny human inhabitant of one world among billions of world and worlds not yet manifested whose very existence is participation in the eternal creation of Being.

Without the thousands, thousands of thousands of stories I have read, heard, told and lived, what a thin shell of a human being I would be, how poor.

Pretty girl reading, by Georges Pavis

 

Not that I have always appreciated the value of stories as I do now. For almost a decade, intent on further educating myself, I purposely confined myself to non-fiction, and if I did read (or write) stories, it was for my own amusement or as fun writing exercises with friends. All the worthwhile stories have already been written, I told myself, and I have read enough of them. Even writing in my blog, which is not often, can feel self-indulgent and irrelevant.

I did read the occasional biography, like the wonderful one about Edward Burne-Jones, The last pre-Raphaelite by Fiona McCarthy, and I read myths for my library talks, with a little fiction to pass the time, but somewhat guiltily. My love of good stories, however, did not wan, and I fed it abundantly with films of outstanding quality. Large sections of the film industry, it seems to me, have understood and done their best to satisfy a demand for intelligent, well-made, meaningful films, and I became an avid movie-goer. 

 

When I did select a book or two of fiction from the library one or two years ago, call it chance or luck or destiny that the books I chose were excellent, and powerfully re-ignited my love of good fiction, intriguing, deep, meaningful stories well-told. Some I had read before, some, like this current book by Doris Lessing, for the first time.

Much of my attitude to life, my ethics and my understanding of humankind, for what it’s worth, was fostered by good fiction. By my eighteenth year, I had internalised to such a degree the values and imagery of fairytales, myths and the stories of Charles Kingsley, Charles Dickens, Victor Hugo, Mary Stewart, Ernest Hemingway, Henry James, Leonard Tolstoy, J.R.R. Tolkien, Ursula LeGuin, and the like that you could say that they are, in a real way, my moral parents.

From fairytales and myths (and my frequent nightmares), I learned quite early in life that life is paradoxical, often dark and violent, and unpredictable, which helped me endure some harsh life experiences with a stoicism that I only later appreciated.

From novels, however, and sometimes, short stories, I have experienced many ways in which humans work through and endure life’s difficulties, and the transformative possibilities in suffering, fear and grief.

Marilynne Robinson’s Gilead, Michel Farber’s The book of strange new things, Doris Lessing’s Shikasta, Landfalls by Naomi Williams, Ben Okri’s The famished road ... oh so many great books in which I have lost myself and emerged more aware, sensitive and human.

 

Boy reading, by Joseph Fielding Smith

 

 

Family, I often say, is the great crucible in which we are most tested and, hopefully, refined and made strong. That is, at least, my experience, from my small first family to the now family of my children and theirs.

I do not exaggerate when I say, then, that books are my imaginal family, that in the whole-hearted surrender to really good stories, I discover and experience the truths of being, its strangeness, its dark mysteries and the endless gyrations of consciousness manifesting itself. Each journey is a wonder, a revelation, a blessing of agony, wonder and awakening. It is a gift for which I give thanks to all those writers who pull out from their own souls these marvellous fictions for us.

Yes, we are all connected

 

 

The philosophical-spiritual principle that we are all fundamentally connected to each other, to all living things and the Supreme Consciousness is part of every major spiritual tradition, though that principle is often forgotten or ignored. At the heart of those traditions, sometimes hidden in their esoteric or mystical teachings is the core teaching that recognition of that connectedness - to each other, to the living universe, to God Mind - is the key to spiritual awakening, and an absolute requirement for the evolution of humankind. Understanding oneness and its implications is also essential to understanding consciousness itself, and developing its as-yet untapped possibilities.

Saying that we use only a fraction of our brains is only a small part of the story: we utilise and know an even tinier fraction of our consciousness, with the effect that most human beings go through life mostly asleep, unaware, unconscious. For the most part, we have no idea of who we are, what we are, or why we behave as we do.

We are, as Carl Jung observed, woefully ignorant of the psyche, and therefore a danger to ourselves. Because we are not aware of the contents of the unconscious mind, its inner demons and capacity for evil, “we are the great danger. The psyche is the great danger” (Jung).

We do not yet understand we are vastly more than a multitude of isolated consciousnesses controlled by minds encased in brains, that we are truly connected and on deeper levels of being, continually interacting with others and the environment. We remain blind to the influence of great societal and global waves of thought and emotional energy upon us, individually and collectively, and blind to our enormous individual and collective potential for growth, enlightenment and greatly-expanded consciousness.

In our collective ignorance, we flounder in fear, competing and vying with each others, holding desperately onto stultifying notions of race, nationality and being more or less than other races or nationalities, or superior to other lifeforms with which we share this planet, creating wars, conflicts, bigger and greedier corporations and oppressive governments and destroying the earth on which we live.

 

 

 

 

 

For all our technological and scientific advancements, psychologically and psychically, we have hardly evolved at all.

 

(from http://monkeyswearingpants.tumblr.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Connectedness is no airy-fairy new-age ideal. It is not science fiction or fantasy. The world really is one.

Everything is connected and interactive, like the great net of Indra through which are scattered bells.

Whenever a bell is set ringing by action in one part of the net, all the bells are set ringing, some louder some softer than others, by the ripples of energy radiating from different points of action.

This is 'entanglement,’ the concept physicist David Bohm’s used to explain that subatomic particles react to each other no matter how far apart (a startling discovery by physicist Alain Aspect and his team). Time is also one, so this ”spooky quantum action at distance and time" says physicist S. Jay Olson, “allows us to send messages from the past to the future.” 

The implication of entanglement, Bohm concluded, is that: "At some deeper level of reality, such particles are not individual entities, but are actually extensions of the same fundamental something".

Einstein spoke of a "spirit ...manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man".  In religious teachings, this universal spirit is called the Mind of God...God Mind.

Other scientists are flirting with the idea, minus the God. Archaeologist  John Hoffecher believes that the connection between us is something we evolved. Early in our evolution, he proposes, humans developed a kind of shared brain, a "super brain", that "spurred a modern capacity for novelty and invention". How such a brain could evolve from purely biological and chemical causes is beyond me, but I find the little fantasies of science quite endearing. Nevertheless, an evolutionary super brain is at least a step towards a grander view of Mind.

Then there is Carl Jung's 'collective consciousness', a concept of shared consciousness from which humanity's myths and universal dream symbols are born. Outwardly committed to empiricism - a material view of the world - Jung stopped short of claiming a metaphysical origin for human consciousness, though his theories implied the existence of forces way beyond the capacity of the brain.

Based on evidence that the memory is not found in any one part of the brain and can even be retrieved after different parts of the brain have been damaged or removed, neuroscientist Karl Pribram and David Bohm came up with a Holonomic Theory of the brain, in which memory, and consciousness itself, is present in every part of the brain, in each cell. Mind may, in fact, not be a product of the brain at all.

Twenty or so years later, Pribram wrote from a more daring perspective that: "the basis function from which both matter and mind are ‘formed’ is flux .....that provides the ontological roots from which conscious experiences regarding matter (physical processes) as well as mind (psychological processes) become actualized in spacetime"

(Consciousness Reassessed, PCNL Library, http://www.paricenter.com/library/papers/pribram02.php).

Rupert Sheldrake postulates that this shared mind, the supermind, is not limited to our brains but exists outside of us in 'morphic fields', energetic fields imprinted with certain informational patterns. It is from these field that the consciousness of plants, animals and human beings draw the 'blueprints', one might say, according to which they pattern their morphology (physical characteristics), growth and potential.

You could think of these morphic fields as archetypal (cosmic patterns, sort of). Indeed, Sheldrake thinks that his theory of fields could help to explain the universality and persistence of mythic and psychological archetypes, and may also be related to the ancient Vedic concept of Akashic Records on which are recorded all human knowledge, experience and memory.  Like the Akashic records, morphic fields are non-local, existing in another dimension yet accessible on this plane of existence. 

(image from Naturalsociety.com)

 

It all sounds very much like the God mind at which Einstein hinted in his 'unified field theory', his magnificent and largely misunderstood theory that the fundamental universal force, the ONE force underlying all known phenomena, manifests in our universe at least as electromagnetic energy. He was, I believe, much closer to the truth than others realised.

Now I realise that some may read this and feel anxious, pull back from the idea that we are all connected because to them it hints of losing one’s identity and individuality. Rest assured: Oneness does not in any way diminish or swallow our individuality. Rather, it intensifies it. When we embrace our connectedness to all human beings, plants and animals, and to the Great Spirit all around us, we feel and appreciate our diversity and individual uniqueness much more intensely. Our individuality shines.

Think of Oneness like sunshine. It lights and embraces all things under the sun. It bestows on all things the same loving, caring and life-giving energies. And reveals much more of their beauty and wonder than could ever be seen in darkness.

 

 

 

 

Where is God?

The great Christian mystic and teacher Meister Eckhart wrote, 

“God is beyond all understanding. A master says: ‘If I had a God that I could understand, I would not regard him as God.’ If you understand anything about him, then he is not in it, and by understanding something of him, you fall into ignorance." ¹

I doubt that Eckhart's words are an injunction to worship and experience God without trying to understand what it is we worship or experience, for it is our nature to want to understand our world, to find meaning in our experiences, especially those of the numinous. I don't just want to think about God. I want to understand the nature of the Divine, and why I am continually drawn to contemplate the Ultimate mystery, like waves drawn endlessly back to the sea.

The paths of devotion and good deeds offer their own rewards and can be fulfilling for those who follow, and both are often strenuously advocated for women. Yet we are body, mind and soul; surely each participates in our spiritual being, and brings different qualities to our spiritual experiences. We are designed to know the Divine through all parts of our being.

Sages and mystics have always taught that we cannot know God through mind alone for Truth greatly exceeds the capacity of the human intellect, no matter how impressive it may be. It is in the opening up of mind, the melting of its borders that opens the Gates of Perception so wide that spirit can be heard and understood by the heart, soul's home within us.

Of course, it has taken me almost a lifetime to know and really understand this, a great deal of struggle and much despair for from childhood, I was convinced that all knowledge could be gained by those who developed a well-trained, disciplined mind and dedicated to study. To hinder the intellect was, to me, unconscionable, but I learned rather early that outside of my small family, the female intellect was often not only hindered but shunned. 

In my early or pre-teens, I began reading the Bible, and in my eagerness to understand some of what I read, I sought out a priest of our little Orthodox church, a man much admired for his humility and sweet nature, and asked if he could explain some thing for me. To my astonishment, he snapped at me irritably, scowling that I must not read the Bible, especially being a girl, that my duty was to listen to the readings in service and pay respect to the holy book with a worshipful kiss. He would not say more, but angrily waved me away. I was shocked and hurt, for he clearly interpreted my earnestness as disrespect for holy tradition.  

I cannot be sure that this priest's reaction arose from beliefs about the female intellect as well as about women's correct place. Maybe it didn't. Nevertheless, it affected me deeply. I never talked about my spiritual seeking with anyone thereafter until well into my fifties, keeping my searches, reflections and questions to myself.

This attitude about woman's place in religion is still, I must admit, a point of discord in my relationship with the institution of religion, which can and does wander from its revelatory origins, often with devastating results. 

What triggered these memories and reflections a few days ago was reading about the female Hindu philosopher, Gargi, and the great Hindu Sage, Yajnavalkya. Gargi asked many questions, each urging the Sage to tell more about the nature of the Divine and Its relationship to the world.

"Yajnavalkya became very angry and said: "O Gargi, do not ask too much and if you ask more, your head will fall off."²

This reminded me also of Peter's hostile reaction to Mary Magdalene's questions to Jesus in the Gospel of Mary and the Pistis Sophia, and the story of Mary of Bethany, whom I imagine soaking in tbe deeper teachings that Jesus gave to his intimates when they were together, the true mysteries of the Divine. 

Except for martyrs and certain acetics or nuns, women are not taken seriously by and large in Christianity, even though Jesus, by all accounts, welcomed them. As in Judiac law, women are often treated as part-persons, corruptible and corrupting and unworthy to speak or read sacred teachings. The depths to which this spiritual mysogeny can fall are clearly illustrated in the horrific murder of the Hellenic mathematician-philosopher, Hypatia, by Cyril's Christian followers (without his approval, I hope) and the centuries-long persecution of women as witches.

These thoughts triggered the  following poem, but it's not about that. I just wanted to share what I was thinking about before and after I wrote it.

 

 

Divinity

 

Ancient Gargi sits

tugging persistent 

at threads of knowledge

reluctantly disclosed,

urging forth one by one

from the Sage's mouth

question by question

revelations

unraveling the precious tapestry

of Everything.

 

Mary sits listening

at the Master's feet

drinking thirstily of the waters

flowing from his mouth

all else forgetting

in this awakening

to the true nature

of Everything.

 

Rise up O soul

from fruitless longing

and know your Source ...

Creator of all that can be named

Father-Mother, Goodness

Ultimate Radiance

wrapped in dark cloud

Naught but Itself

containing Everything.

 

Simplicity

mysterium tremendum

caught by those who fish

in deep parables and riddles

Too fragile to be spoken

Too strong to be broken

into easier parts

Light as the space between flickering atoms

Ponderous beyond all bearing

Needing nothing

Giving Everything.

 

Divinity

Infinite potential

Fundament of the world

and all possible worlds

manifest and unmanifest

Unborn, Imperishable, Undivided

male and female, light and darkness

action-passivity

Transcendent - within Everything.

 

Maker of the Law of 

Perpetual Unfolding

of the law-breakers 

and their redeemers

Permitter of ego's devilish desire

Source of hope insistent

of fortitude

Love, the Law fulfilled.

 

O refuge, O comfort, strength

that lifts me through lifetimes

out of fear, doubt, ignorance.

Without It, separate, 

I would not be

 

Nor all the universes.

 

¹ Meister Eckhart, Sermon 12

²http://somaditya-banerjee.blogspot.com.au/2010/04/st¹ ory-of-yajnavalkya-and-gargi.html

What is it about Easter?

Easter has always been a time of deep reflection for me as I try to make sense of the two great events that it represents: the crucifixion of the Master Yeshua, and his resurrection as the Christ.

This year is different. I can't explain why, but I feel this Easter more intensely, am more deeply moved by it, more perplexed by the profound mystery of it ... 

 Maybe it's because I am now at peace with the idea of the crucifixion. I have never been able to reconcile the teaching that Jesus died to wash away our sins with my belief in a God of love and peace. Did not Jesus say that God does not want our blood sacrifices, not of lambs or doves, and surely not of the Holy One? Are we not responsible and accountable for our own wrongdoing, and for bringing ourselves into closer harmony with Divine Law?

As I understand it (in my limited way), Yeshua was crucified because of our errors, because the people rejected him and his teachings despite the healings, the wisdom of his words, the miracles. Even when he willingly fulfilled the ancient messianic prophecy of his cruel death and three days later, his resurrection, many would not believe.

Yet how many, I wonder, watched or heard about that cruelty, that death, and recognised that this was no ordinary man. They might have been able to explain away the healings and other signs, but this, the Christ surely knew, would be hard to rationalise. And if He rose from the dead, then maybe each person's soul will also survive death, bearing with it all the weight or light accumulated according to that person's thoughts and deeds. 

How many more, though, never 'got' it, and still don't.

Every Easter, when we remember that the Master endured crucifixion so that he could testify to the immortality of the soul and our sacred obligation to tend to the state of that soul, let us reflect on the enormity of God's love and infinite, patient compassion. In the end, it is said, every soul will return to its creator, but how long He waits, with what loving pity does He watch us fail life after life to understand and embrace the Divine Law that He came among us in the Christ to teach. 

And with what joy He embraces each enlightened soul, and welcomes it home!

That is what I see in Easter .... Yeshua accepting a cruel death for the sake of our eventual redemption, an expression of Love that goes far beyond anything that we can even imagine .... love of incomprehensible dimensions that transcends far beyond the physical event of that death.

There are no words for it. I am simply overwhelmed, and deeply deeply shaken every time I think of that Love, which defies all logic or reason yet pours onto us ceaselessly and desires nothing but our awakening to the joy and beauty of the God within. 

What can I do but surrender to the mystery and give thanks, and know myself - all of us - blessed?

 

Ted Nottingham looks deeper into the mystery of Pascha, Easter.

Spiritual teacher Ted Nottingham conveys a powerful message about holy Easter, Pascha in Eastern Orthodoxy, its deep symbolism, and its significance for us in our time. And as with all of his videos, this dear one accompanies his message with beautiful images and glorious music. Listen and watch with open heart, open mind, and be blessed.