In the meantime, awareness of the inner body has other benefits in the physical realm. One of them is a significant slowing down of the aging of the physical body.

Whereas the outer body normally appears to grow old and wither fairly quickly, the inner body does not change with time, except that you may feel it more deeply and become it more fully.

If you are twenty years old now, the 'energy field of your inner body' will feel just the same when you are eighty. It will be just as vibrantly alive.

As soon as your habitual state changes from being 'out of the body and trapped in your mind', to being 'in the body and present in the Now', your physical body will feel lighter, clearer, more alive. As there is more consciousness in the body, its molecular structure actually becomes less dense. More consciousness means a lessening of the illusion of materiality.

When you become identified more with the 'timeless inner body' than with the 'outer body', when 'presence' becomes your normal mode of consciousness, and past and future no longer dominate your attention, you do not accumulate time anymore in your psyche and in the cells of the body. The accumulation of time as the psychological burden of past and future greatly impairs the cells' capacity for self-renewal.

So if you inhabit the inner body, the outer body will grow old at a much slower rate, and even when it does, your timeless essence will shine through the outer form, and you will not give the appearance of an old person.

- - - - -
KAREN ARMSTRONG -

Tape: The Future of God (Notes on the Tape - numbers in text are indicative of the timing of the tape)

Does God have a future? - in the 60s God was Dead - Right now in 1995, 33% of people in England don’t believe in God i.e. the God of classic theism: the God who is seen as ‘all present’, ‘omnipotent’, ‘compassionate’.

Where was he in Auschwich? - If present - he didn’t prevent it. If he couldn’t prevent it - he is not ‘omnipotent’. If God didn’t want to prevent it: he is a monster!

Not believing in a ‘theistic God’, doesn’t mean one is not interested in spirituality. However, it’s difficult and for some impossible to get rid of religion - religion was created at the same time that art was produced - But is there a “supernatural” God? - Buddhism says NO.

At 17yr of age KA entered an religious order - hoping to find fulfillment in the “Being”, God. I was trained,, she says, in the Victorian mode, which made me self-conscious, and depressed. And thus God receded. It’s a dogma of the Catholic Church, that God is a Supreme Being, infinite. I eventually found this "pompous, arrogant", drained from emotion. I became bored with that God. Judaism, Islam, and the Eastern Church look at the God ‘concept’ differently. In the West, she feels, we are rather arrogant. In other religions the God-idea is an ‘experience of God’ - we should not feel ‘shackled’ by the notion of our Christian God. 10

The West has its own idea of God. But ideas of God have changed over time. My notion of God became unsatisfactory, incomplete if compared with the rich monotheistic traditions (of Judaism & Islam). With others, I find the idea of God incredible - totally inadequate.

Proof of God’s existence was started by Islam in 7^th c. Their rational development was: seeking proof for existence of God - in Aristotle and in Plato. Jews for a while took part in this rationalization. The Greeks did not: They instinctively realized “rationalizing” would not “fit God”. They believed God cannot be proven, or explained. Just like a poem, or music cannot be explained. The Greeks depended on Icons and contemplation for experiencing and so understanding God - they didn’t need ‘proof’. Jews later realized that the “God of reason” could not help them, they found the God of the philosophers too remote, and it led the to return of interest in the Kabbalah, mystical experience of God. So did later the Muslims turn to philosophical mystics, the Suffis. But Christians still want to “prove” God’s existence as Islam and Jews had tried to do in their past. 15

Since the Reformation, there is a scientific revolution going on, that is starting a new society, stimulating the effort to make religion scientific and rational. But by trying to “prove” God, the concept became vulnerable. Scientist tried to find room for God in the universe. Darwin’s evolution theory - so frowned upon (in the US), because one sees Gn 1 as a literal fact, - sees Gn’s as a myth, pointing to spiritual values and truths.

Darwin is much better accepted in Muslim world. The Druse too, used science as ‘stepping stone’ to understanding God.

The West has a more rationalistic and antropo-morphic notion of God. In the West, God is/has a personality as our own, with likes and dislikes, which is eccentric.

In early Hebrew Scriptures God is presented in a human way: angry, jealous etc. The Prophets made him absolute transcendent. Second Is f.ex. says :

“My thoughts are not your thoughts, my ways are not your ways. As high as the heavens are above the earth are my thoughts, my ways above yours”.

Christians adhere to a personal God. They even see God becoming a personality on earth in the Christ. 20 Muslims also see God as if he(!!) were a human being: seeing, hearing, judging, sitting on a throne. The personal God has been a help in the beginning when one was searching to understand God, it shows the sacredness of humanity (using humanness to picture God). But the great monotheists expressed this not to be enough, though it is a good starting point. God is more than simply ‘personal’.

Greek Orthodox came up with the Trinity, seeing God expressed in three persons, or better three manifestations. God is not just simply a single personality. Muslims say God is more than a person, some going so far as NOT to call God a “being”, but rather a “nothing”, because he is none of the things that exist.

Modern concepts of God are human formulas . It is easy to create a God in our own image and likeness. 25 Crusaders did it when they killed Jews and Muslims with the words “God wills it”. They brought their feelings of hatred over to the God they had created, believing that God hated and wanted the death of the Jews and Muslims.

Preachers do that too - very often: Gods want this, God hates that - expressing what the preacher likes or dislikes.

We can make God into an extreme Republican or a radical Democrat or even a fanatical racist. 28

Atheism is a healthy form of iconoclasm - doing away with the man-made stuff of icons/idols.

People in our days feel that they have to get rid of the old concepts of God, that lingers as a “bad taste”. This process of cleansing leads to new faith, to a new notion of God.

Change of idea about God found resistence in the ‘tradition’. A certain reform-movement tries to go back to early days of the church. But it is impossible to return, to believe in a God as early Christians did - or the first generations of Muslims.

Circumstances have changed - view of the world has changed - view on God will be different accordingly. We fly now through the air, we dress with cloths that would be worn by kings in early days, we even go into outer space.

The way we understand God has to change too! 30

There were changes in the past: monotheism was not always the same - Abraham, Moses believed in monotheism but knew there were other gods, though they choose to worship only the God of Israel, but he was also a God of war and sometimes cruel and not universal. The 6^th c. Prophets changed the God-idea, transformed the ancient notion, saw God as absolute transcendent, and universal. For them the primordial beauty of compassion is more important than the Temple and sacrifices.

In the 6^th c. BCE the notion of God changed because the Israelites were living in a different world - in cities - a different civilization - they were not nomads anymore.

In the 1^st c. CE, it was possible that some Jews could even consider a crucified man in some sense to be ‘divine’. It was a blasphemy for Judaism, and even for educated pagans (Paul: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 1C 2:23).

Christianity was a major revolution of religion in that time. Thoughts, ideas, that were sacred in the past and immutable, had to go, so there could be a new concept of the divine.

If people changed idea of God in the past, why not now? 33 (over)

We cannot predict the change. It has been radical in the past. And this might be happening now too! But we can at least say: perhaps what it is, should NOT be!

But be aware of a-too-rationalistic-concept, or a too antropo-morphístic one (cf HG 186).

Beware also of making God ‘religiously righteous’ instead of ‘compassionate’ (‘fundamentalism’ can do this, as well as the New Right, Moral Majority, etc. see HG 390) All major religions see compassion as a litmus test for real spirituality. They didn’t always live up to it, because of giving attention to other matters. But religion in general has helped to keep compassion as the ideal before our eyes (it was clearly the teaching of Jesus! See Exploration Course).

We, human beings find it very difficult to live up to our human nature. Dogs seem to have no trouble at all to live up to their canine nature. It is difficult for us to be humane to one another.

All major religions have realized that God/Nirvana/Brahman.... is NOT “out there”, but in the heart of the human, in the ground of every single individual. (HG 383 also ref to Paul Tillich and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin and many others...cf 390 and we can add: Meister Eckhart, Spong, James Robinson, William Kingsland, e.o)

Rituals can be important for acknowledging the divinity in the other person (Hindu - hands - bowing), expresses the notion that God has to included in the acceptance of the sacredness of human life. This is also central in NT, Talmud and Koran. One cannot have a healthy notion of God if one turns away from others, just because they have different ideas, belong to a different race etc.

Learning from other religions can help to find a ‘new faith’ or a new understanding of "one’s faith". In the past that was not so easy because geographical distance made it difficult to learn from others. This is completely different in our century. We can learn from others’ mistakes, because we can observe them from close by. 38

For many folks other religions are threatening. Fundamentalists easily retreat into their own nominational, sectarian getthos.

Contact with other religions can make us see our own religion in a complete new light..

Religious experiences have been deep down so similar, though the expression of faith might be done in different ways, with different terminology, but the underlying experience is uncommonly similar.

Will there be in the future one gigantic religion to which all will belong?

Some have tried some kind of ‘take-over’ bit, or a merger - bringing others into their own flock.

We should hang on to our own individual tradition. Each of the major religions has accumulated a store of wisdom. By delving into this rich past, we can save ourselves the exhausting task of starting from scratch.

The faith in which have been brought up has made us what we are.

Suffis (of Islam) have great deal to teach us (see HG). They are an outstanding example of appreciating of other faiths, while holding on to their own. 40

A Suffi can cry in ecstacy that he is no longer a Jew, a Christian or a Muslim. He feels at home in a synagogue, a temple, church and mosque. Because once he found God, he does not need all those man-made distinctions. (that’s what the Unitarian must feel!!)

God is the ultimate reality to which all religions point.

Some people had unhappy experiences in the faith in which they have been born. Says Karen Armstrong: I myself have difficulty to accept Roman Catholicism completely. But even so, my Catholic past will influence me until the day I die.

What helps in comparative religious studies is that it makes you see your own religion differently. It’s very rare that study of another religion would convert to that other religion.- it makes you see your own religion in quite a different light.

My own study, she says, of Judaism, Islam, Greek Orthodoxy made me see better what Roman Catholicism was trying to do at its best - or were it has gone astray.

Studying religions should not be aimed at one main world religion. Rather the goal should be to find what ideas and practices have really been helpful to humanity or unhelpful, inadequate.

So Buddhists find our notions of God inadequate and even blasphemous - because they are antropo-mórphic. Expressing God in human terms is exactly what Buddhists say we must try to transcend. They make an excellent point!

Buddhists on Nirvana use same terms as monotheists do of God - also some Buddhists claim Nirvana doesn’t exist just like some in monotheism say God doesn’t exist.

Buddha when asked to describe Nirvana, answered: That is an inappropriate question. - It is the same for us about God.

Spiritual life talks about a cloud of unknowing when talking about approach to God - there will be obscurity and darkness (the ‘dark night of the soul’ for John of the Cross, it was for him a prelude to enlightenment).

Moses climbing up the mountain into the cloud - didn’t see anything, but knew God was there.

If we feel uncomfortable with the traditional notions about God - climb into the darkness!

But ... we want instant gratification!

We live in a world fast food, of constant noise.

Religion (or rather spirituality) is like ‘art’. - A poet needs quiet to create a poem from the unconscious. Patient receptiveness is necessary to reach the divine. Mysticism teaches us a lot about that.

Most people were not mystics, because they were not capable of the austere discipline mysticism requires. (!! austere discipline)

The mystical tradition provided most people with their perception of God. Common people accepted to see God as totally mysterious, only to be found in the death of the self.

The West could never put mysticism in the center of religious experience. [!!]

After the fall of the Roman Empire the West in Europe was plunged into a dark age of barbarism. - In the 14^th c. the West was ready to develop its own mysticism. There were great masters as Meister Eckhart, and the 4 English mystics, and many others.

When mysticism got on the way, Reformation came along. The Reformist didn’t approve of mysticism, - because it was too much connected with monasticism. 45 They wanted to do away with the monasteries. - Even the Roman Catholic church looked rather disapprovingly on mysticism - Inquisition was often involved with mysticism-cases.

Mysticism in the West was rather for ‘oddballs’ - our religion is much more rationalistic. 48

Instead of quietly entering the darkness and the unknown, we rather spend lot of time talking to God - we like to define our thoughts and feelings in great detail. One author wrote a booklet “Poor little talkative Christians”. Somehow we have to learn to keep silent and develop a patient receptive attitude.

There is no easy and quick answer. We are used to getting thing “on order”. - in religious experience we expect to get instant enlightenment (speaking of tongues...) - We would like to become a mystic by taking evening classes or one semester and be mystics afterward.

A Poet and a religious person must be capable of remaining in half-truth - waiting for the religious experience to arrive in its own good time.

Earliest art had a deeply cultic dimension - Art is used all through history to express religious experiences of God - or give some hint of it - in dancing, fictional stories, icons, poetry (Koran is appealing because of its beauty of sound and poetry). 50 - Art is invasive, get’s under our skin and reaches the last crevices of our existence through all our prejudices, our distances, to a depth that we might not have realized that we got.

When listening to music, looking at a painting, or hearing a poem, we feel lifted above ourselves, or like something buried deep beneath us has been touched.

Religion [spirituality] should be that way. Suffi hold: the way to God is not through reason and logic, but through creative imagination, that world of imagery. The mystic has to learn to enter into that interior world of personal imagery. In encountering there the own self he will encounter his own God. This God not the same for everyone. (cf HG 233 and passim in \‘God of mystics’).

Sufi: God has spoken a personal word in each of us. Each human being is therefore an epiphany, manifestation of the divine on earth, - an incarnation if you will. (HG 237)

The ‘word’ or ‘name’ spoken in the heart of each individual is unique. We would only discover that particular name of God, which God had spoken within us.

Follows: God never completely can be defined, since he expressed him/her-self in the millions of people.

The Rabbis said the same:

Israelites at the foot of Mt.Sinai experienced God in his/her own personal way. No objective idea of God as if that would be the same for everyone.

[Bishop Lucker: “What I came to see during the 2^nd Vat Council is that revelation involves God’s self-communication to us. And we can never understand the mystery of God. We can never adequately explain or express the revelation of God. That leads humans on a constant search for a better way to express the mysteries of God.” “He saw Vat.II as a more adequate way to understand and to apply the teachings of Jesus to new situation, new conditions of the world.” NCR 5-25-01]

In West we have made our idea of God an affair of the establishment. The churches lay down the law what we should believe about God. Not so in the Jewish and Islam tradition. Ideas about God are there a personal matter. Instead of finding a definition of God to impose it on other people, the same for all in society, or for all humanity - we should start a journey within ourselves to find the divine within us.

This God-idea will be personal to us - and unique. Perhaps in this way we will be able to recognize that every other person we meet also has a hidden divinity within them - we should try to find the particular mystery in others - its uniqueness and beauty. That’s what Dante saw in Beatrice - and the Sufi Ibn al-Arabi in Sophia (HG 236/7). - We should be able to discover an epiphany, manifestation of God in other people. Effort of imagination, yes, but geared toward reality, not a fantasy. Instead of wordy definitions, we should learn to wait in silence and obscurity, and to enter into the mystery within us - as well as recognize the God in others.

This brings us to the subject of prayer. Prayer is described as ‘silent waiting upon God’. Just as there is no one objective deity out there, the same for everybody - so no one cast-iron method of prayer to be imposed on all. We all have to find our particular method of prayer, just as we have to discover our own personal God.

I wrestled (in convent) with the Ignatian method - and I got nowhere. I found it frankly boring, difficult to keep my mind on my prayer - it led to an increasing sense of defeat and inadequacy. That method was not right for me - though it has helped many others. Some persons are silent by nature - easily can get into receptive stillness and can quietly enter within themselves and wait passively. For me, kneeling down and praying makes me feel exhausted and frightened. My method of prayer that’s working for me, will not necessarily work for everybody.

I found, that while studying and doing research for my books... emerging myself often in Sacred texts, I frequently get a brief glimmer of transcendence, of awe and wonder, that illuminates the whole page. May last only a second - and I’m taking notes again, snapped back to the cerebral mode. But for a second I’m lifted up above myself or touched deeply within. I’v not been able to predict or engineer these moments, they just arrive.

My Jewish friends tell me that I’m very Jewish in my spirituality. This is what Jews do when they immerse themselves in study of Torah or Talmud, when they recite the sacred Hebrew words and argue about their meaning.

St.Benedict - founder of the Benedictine Order - prescribes for his monks everyday a period of lectio divina, of divine study. During this time the monks might occasionally experience flashes of oratio, prayer, lasting only a second.

I stumbled on this by accident, seeking information about prayer in the British Library.. This is what works for me.

Liturgy can be helpful, as well as church services. The liturgy of Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches was designed as theatrical performance, and they can - just as theater - give us moments of wonder and transcendence.

We must be aware not to be too verbal in our prayers, - not being so conscious and fearful about prayer.

For many people art is the only access to transcendence. Religion and art are very closely aligned. Music, painting, poetry can help us to pray. We should not mind what others are doing, but find out what fits us, and what we enjoy.

Western Christianity has seen God often as an angry God, knowing all our faults and failings and inducing so a feeling of guilt. This embeds us in the ego that we must try to transcend.

Many of us who are brought up in the Christian tradition feel ashamed of ourselves, dissatisfied because of our sinfulness. In prayer too, we can feel hopelessly inadequate and lacking. All our faults and failings and what we are, is not very important. What really matters is what we are trying to achieve when we realize the divinity in ourselves, or - as Buddhism would say - to fulfill the deepest human potential.

Author of the Cloud of the Unknowing (cf HG 252, MZM 131): “It is not what you are that God regards with his most merciful eyes, but what Thou wouldest be”. 60

Reflection on “understanding”. Does spirituality exclude “understanding”. - Yes and No.

Yes: “And the deepest level of communication is not communication, but communion. It is wordless. It is beyond words, and it is beyond speech, and it is beyond concept.” Merton

No: because the mind observes ‘the communion’; is conscious of it; witnesses it, but cannot conceptualize it.

There is (intellectual) knowing and (experiential) ‘knowing’. Merton calls the first “the arrogant gaze of our investigating mind”. Of the second he says “we have to perform a sort of somersault to ‘became aware of ourselves as known by him’ - and by following this path we discover who we are.”

Reflection GCS: I do not need to worship "God", the "Divine", I do not need to 'adore', rather I seek "union with" the Divine. The "divine" is the Being of my 'being', or rather I am 'being' of the "divine Being", just as the cosmos - in all it details/elements - is "being of the Being". That's what unites, connects 'all'. Thus, the "Divine" is not an "IT", but part of, or rather basis of the "WE", the "US". That does not mean that "we all" are the "divine" (pantheism), but that all are connected with, share with "the Divine": 'Being', Existence, Life. (seen as the "spark" by the gnostics, the "outpression" of Fowler, "Ground of our being" of P.Tillich, J.Robinson. W.Kingsland).

Karen Armstrong TSS : ... God is also the ground of all being and can be experienced almost as a presence in the depths of the psyche. - Faith was really the cultivation of a conviction that life had some ultimate meaning and value. - Credo ut intelligam, I commit myself in order that I may understand. 292

.... the religious quest is not about discovering "the truth" or_. "the meaning of life" but about living as intensely as possible here and now. The idea is not to latch on to some superhuman personality or to "get to heaven" but to discover how to be fully human-hence the images of the perfect or enlightened man, or the deified human being. 271

.... I would experience mini-seconds of transcendence, awe, and wonder that gave me some sense of what had been going on in the mind of the theologian or mystic I was studying. At such a time I would feel stirred deeply within, and taken beyond myself, in much the same way as I was in a concert hall or a theater. 287

- - - - -
Martin Buber I and Thou.

One of the finest conceptual expressions of how the sacred is experienced in the everyday is Martin Buber’s description of 'I-It' and 'I-You' ways of being in his famous book I and Thou.

Buber argues that we as humans have two fundamentally different ways of being in relationship to the world, the totality of things, including nature, culture, and persons: the way of I-It, and the way of I-You.

The way of I-It is by far the most common; in fact, it represents normal adult consciousness. Within this mode of being, the world is experienced within the framework of the subject-object distinction: 'I' experience myself as a subject separate from a world of objects, as an ego aware of itself and its differentiation from the world. Even our grammar embodies this difference: I (subject) see you (object).

The 'I-It' way of being is the world of our ordinary experience: the world of cause and effect, of ordered space and time; the world as domesticated by the culturally created grid of language, categories, and knowledge.

'I-You' moments are very different, much harder to describe, and comparatively rare. I-You moments 'appear as queer lyric-dramatic episodes' and are often dismissed by people for whom the I-It world seems to be the real world.

'How powerful is the continuum of the It-world,' Buber writes, 'and how tender the manifestations of the You!'

The I-You way of being is the opposite of I-It. It is the world of relation and connectedness as opposed to separation and differentiation. The world within an I-You mode of being is uncategorized and thus appears fresh, new, and undomesticated.

The 'I' of the 'I-You' moments is different from the 'I’ of the 'I-It' experience.

The 'I' of the 'I-You' is wholly present and wholly involved so that no part of the ego-self (the 'I' of the 'I-It') is left over. (See further: Tolle A New Earth)

The self-conscious I ( the 'ego-I') disappears; ego boundaries and ego awareness momentarily melt away. Thus the world of I-You is the world of no-time and of the eternal now, for there is no part of the self that is thinking about past or future. In I-You moments, the world is known as a 'You'—that is, as the phrase itself implies, as a 'presence' rather than as an 'object'.

Indeed, such moments are glimpses of 'the eternal You', experiences of 'the sacred', 'the divine', in which 'the beyond' is experienced in the 'finite/existing', and in the 'here and now'.

At a celebration of his eightieth birthday, Buber denied being a prophet, philosopher, or theologian but instead said about himself, 'I am only someone who has seen something and who goes to a window and points.' What he points to is 'the eternal You,' known in the midst of the everyday life.

- - - - -

The "Exercise" was:

Each participant was asked to answer with 'one word' what would come to their mind when hearing the word GOD.

The answers were put in 2 columns: Traditional & Spiritual.

Some answers did fit both (or neither) and landed up under 'Either'.

The exercise was enlightening to the class seeing the results, and it invited quite some discussion.

Below is the result of the 'Exercise'.

Last part of the class was used to go over the "Quotes and Remarks", which you can find below.

TRADITIONAL         SPIRITUAL           EITHER

Almighty                Spirit                 Love

Savior                   Universe              All Encompassing

Church                  Inner Light           Friend

Supreme                 Expansive             Creator

Father                   Inner Peace          Non-Believer

Trinity                   Unknown             Tension

Power                    Giver                 Patience

Judge                    Compassion           Unexplainable

                          Connectedness        Pantheist (Everything is God)

                          Divine

                          Presence

                          Life Giver

                          Being

                          I AM

         added later    (Healing Energy)

                          (Ground of all being - Tllich)

- - - - -
Quotes and Remarks

1. "God is the ultimate source of life. One worships this God by living fully, by sharing deeply.

2. "God is the ultimate source of love. One worships this God by loving wastefully, by spreading love frivolously, by giving love away without stopping to count the cost.

3. "God is Being - the reality underlying everything that is. To worship this God you must be willing to risk all, abandoning your defenses and your self-imposed or culturally constructed security systems." Spong about 'his God'.

4. God and the divine are described as a creative energy, which is perceived to include, but also supersede, everything traditional theology attributes to God,

5. The divine energy is not stable or unchanging, but works through movement, rhythm, pattern, arid restlessness - within the evolving nature of life itself,

6. The divine co-creativity operates within the evolutionary process rather than as an external agent based on a cause and effect relationship. O'Murchu

7. "Notions such as ‘God’ and ‘divinity’ are to be used sparingly, because these are human concepts (descriptions) that may limit rather than enhance our understanding of life̓s ultimate source and meaning." QT The God Question

8. ‘Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled. Mt 5:6 - In a contemporary paraphrase: You're blessed when you've worked up a good appetite for God. God is food and drink in the best meal you will ever eat. That mysterious appetite began like an itch, but it was a spiritual itch, a feeling of restlessness, like a tiny pebble in my shoe that I couldn't get rid of. Linda Douty A Hunger for God

9. "God has placed time bombs within us set to go off and blow a gaping hole in us to keep us searching." Alan Jones Soulmaking

10. “I once had a dream in which I, even though a man, was pregnant like a woman with child. I was pregnant with nothingness, and out of this nothingness God was born.” "I pray God to rid me of God.” “God created all things in such a way that they are not outside himself, as ignorant people falsely imagine. Rather, all creatures flow outward, but nonetheless remain within God.” “We must learn to penetrate things and find God there”. Meister Eckhart MME

11. ‟There is a shadow side to all reality - even to our concepts of God!"

12. “We are part and parcel of this immense intelligence, this Spirit-in-action, this God-in-the-making”. Ken Wilber Brief History 42

13. "The God of the metaphysical age is dead. There is not a personal god out there external to human beings and the material world. We must reckon with a deep crisis in ‘god talk’ and replace it with talk about whether the universe has meaning and whether human life has purpose." Robert Funk no.1 of 21 theses

14. “There is no conflict between God and man, no hostility between spirit and body, no wedge between the holy and the secular. Man does not exist apart from God. The human is the borderline of the divine. Life passes on in proximity to the sacred, and it is the proximity that endows existence with ultimate significance. In our relation to the immediate we touch upon the most distant. Even the satisfaction of physical needs can be a sacred act. Perhaps the essential message of Judaism is that in doing the finite we may perceive the infinite. It is incumbent on us to obtain the perception of the impossible in the possible, the perception of life eternal in everyday deeds. God is not hiding in a temple. The Torah came to tell inattentive man: "You are not alone, you live constantly in holy neighborhood; remember: `Love thy neighbor - God - as thyself." We are not asked to abandon life and to say farewell to this world, but to keep the spark within aflame, and to suffer His light to reflect in our face. Let our greed not rise like a barrier to this neighborhood. God is waiting on every road that leads from intention to action, from desire to satisfaction.” Abrahan Heschel Man is not Alone 265

15. "Religion is not merely an assent to a set of beliefs, but a rich, multifaceted fabric of teachings and experiences that connect us with the divine." Elaine Pagels Beyond Belief

16. When God breathed life into the world, He not only made a piece of clay come to life, but he also enabled that piece of clay to transcend life. That is my spirituality. Goldman GaH 45

17. “I would rather believe in God and die to find out the there is none .... Than not to believe in God and die to find out that there is a God.” [Why? Afraid of meeting a 'judging God'?]

- - - - -
Pentecost, It Is

The night you came to me
Out of endless timelessness
To say, Hello, I love you --

Wasn’t that a great night?
To think of all those stars
and you out there, and now

In here? How wonderful,
how sweet it was and is --
your love for me --

And that was only our first date.
Since then it’s been hours, days,
years of holding hands

Discovering your secrets
disclosing my own, for healing
only your love can provide.

-- Judith Robbins
Whitefield, Maine

- - - - -   

 Reflection on reading

Consciousness - becoming aware of the Presence, of 'being'

The Buddha is said to have given a "silent sermon" once during which he held up a flower and gazed at it. After a while, one of those present, a monk, began to smile. He, it has been said, was the only one who had understood the sermon. According to legend, that smile (that is to say, that 'realization') was handed down by twenty-eight successive masters and much later became the origin of Zen.

Seeing beauty in a flower could awaken humans, however briefly, to the beauty that is an essential part of their own 'innermost being', their 'true nature'. Jesus tells us to contemplate the flowers and learn from them how to live.

The first recognition of beauty was one of the most significant events in the evolution of human consciousness. The feelings of joy and love are intrinsically connected to that recognition. Without us fully realizing it, flowers have become for us an expression 'in form' of that which is most high, most sacred, and ultimately 'formless within ourselves'.

Since time immemorial, flowers, crystals, precious stones, and birds have held special significance for the human spirit.

Like all life-forms, they are, of course, temporary manifestations of the underlying 'one Life', one 'Consciousness'. Their special significance and the reason why humans feel such fascination for and affinity with them can be attributed to their ethereal quality.

Once there is a certain degree of 'Presence', of still and alert attention, in human beings' perceptions, they can sense the divine life essence, the one indwelling consciousness or spirit in every creature, every life-form, recognize it as one with their 'own essence' or 'being', and so love it as themselves.

Until this happens, however, most humans see only the outer forms, unaware of the inner essence, just as they are unaware of their 'own essence', and identify only with their own physical and psychological form.

In the case of a flower, a crystal, precious stone, or bird, however, even someone with little or no Presence can occasionally sense that there is more there than the mere physical existence of that form, without knowing that this is the reason why he or she is drawn toward it, feels an affinity with it. Because of its ethereal nature, its form obscures the indwelling spirit to a lesser degree than is the case with other life-forms. The exception to this are all newborn life-forms-babies, puppies, kittens, lambs, and so on. They are fragile, delicate, not yet firmly established in materiality. An innocence, a sweetness and beauty that are not

of this world still shine through them. They delight even relatively insensitive humans.

So when you are alert and contemplate a flower, crystal, or bird without naming it mentally, it becomes a window for you into the 'formless'. There is an inner opening, however slight, into the realm of spirit.

Is humanity ready for a transformation of consciousness, an inner flowering so radical and profound that compared to it the flowering of plants, no matter how beautiful, is only a pale reflection?

Can human beings lose the density of their conditioned mind structures and become like crystals or precious stones, so to speak, transparent to the light of consciousness?

Can a human defy the gravitational pull of materialism and materiality and rise above 'identification with form', keeping so the 'ego' in place, and condemning it to imprisonment within its own personality?

It will take a shift in consciousness, that means, to be awaken. But it can 'waken' only those who are ready. An essential part of the 'awakening' is the recognition of the 'un-awakened you', t.i. the 'ego' as it thinks, speaks and acts, like an imposter pretending to be 'you'.

When you recognize the unconscious in you, you are awakening.

A lady lost a ring, dear to her. She was very upset! Didn't realize that she would have to let go of the ring at some point. How much more time do you need before you will be ready to let go of it? Will you become 'less' when you let go of the ring? Has 'who you are' become diminished by the loss?" There were a few minutes of silence after the last question.

When she started speaking again, there was a smile on her face, and she seemed at peace. "The last question made me realize something important. First I went to my mind for an answer and my mind said, `Yes, of course you have been diminished'. Then I asked myself the question again, `Has 'who I am' become diminished?' This time I tried 'to feel rather than think' the answer. And suddenly I could feel it all. I can still feel it now, something peaceful, but very alive."

That is the joy of 'Being'. You can only 'feel' the peace and joy, once you get out of your head. 'Being' must be felt; It can't be 'thought'. The 'ego' doesn't know about it because thought is what 'ego' consists of. The ring was really in your head as a thought that you confused with the sense of 'I Am'. You thought the 'I Am' or a part of it was in the ring.

Whatever the 'ego' seeks and gets attached to, are substitutes for the 'Being' that it cannot feel. You can value and care for things, but whenever you get 'attached; to them, you will know it's the 'ego'. And you are never really attached to a thing but to a thought that has 'I', 'me', or 'mine' in it. Whenever you completely accept a loss, you go beyond ego, and then 'who you are', the 'I Am', your consciousness emerges.

Although body-identification is one of the most basic forms of 'ego', the good news is that it is also the one that you can most easily go beyond. This is done not by trying to convince yourself that you are not your body, but by shifting your attention from the 'external form' of your body and from 'thoughts about your body' -beautiful, ugly, strong, weak, too fat, too thin - to the feeling of 'aliveness inside it'. No matter what your body's appearance is on the outer level, within the 'outer form' there is an 'intensely alive energy field'.

If you are not familiar with 'inner body awareness', close your eyes for a moment and find out if there is life inside your hands. Don't ask your mind. It will say, "I can't feel anything." Probably it will also say, "Give me something more interesting to think about." So instead of asking your mind, go to the hands directly. By this I mean become aware of the subtle feeling of aliveness inside them. It is there. You just have to go there with your attention to notice it. You may get a slight tingling sensation at first, then a feeling of energy or aliveness. If you hold your attention in your hands for a while, the sense of aliveness will intensify. Some people won't even have to close their eyes. They will be able to feel their 'inner hands' at the same time as they read this. Then go to your feet, keep your attention there for a minute or so, and begin to feel your hands and feet at the same time. Then incorporate other parts of the body, legs, arms, abdomen, chest, and so on - into that feeling until you are aware of the inner body as a 'global sense of aliveness'.

What I call the 'inner body' isn't really the body anymore but 'life energy', the bridge between form and formlessness.

Make it a habit to feel the inner body as often as you can. After a while, you won't need to close your eyes anymore to feel it. For example, see if you can feel the inner body whenever you listen to someone. It almost seems like a paradox: When you are in touch with the inner body, you are not identified with your body anymore, nor are you identified with your mind. This is to say, you are no longer identified with 'form' but moving away from form-identification toward form-lessness, which we may also call 'Being'. It is your 'essence identity'.

Body awareness not only anchors you in the present moment, it is a doorway out of the prison that is the 'ego'. It also strengthens the immune system and the body's ability to heal itself.

There are people who experienced that 'emerging new dimension of consciousness' as a result of tragic loss at some point in their lives. Some lost all of their possessions, others their children or spouse, their social position, reputation, or physical abilities.

In some cases, through disaster or war, they lost all of these simultaneously and found themselves with 'nothing'. Whatever they had identified with, whatever gave them their sense of self, had been taken away. Still there are some for whom the anguish or intense fear they initially felt has given way to a sacred sense of Presence, a deep peace and serenity and complete freedom from fear. It is a peace that doesn't seem to make sense, and the people who experienced it may ask themselves: In the face of this, how can it be that I feel such peace?

The answer is simple, once you realize what the 'ego' is and how it works. When forms that you had identified with, that gave you your sense of self, collapse or are taken away, it can lead to a collapse of the 'ego', since 'ego' is identification with form. When there is nothing to identify with anymore, - your sense of Beingness, of 'I Am', is freed from its entanglement with form: Spirit is released from its imprisonment in matter. You realize your essential identity as formless, as an all-pervasive Presence, of Being prior to all forms, all identifications. You realize your true identity as consciousness itself, rather than what consciousness had identified with. That awareness of Being, connects you with the Being, the Divine, that makes 'all' possible. That's the peace of God. The ultimate truth of who you are is not 'I am this' or 'I am that', but 'I Am'.

Whenever tragic loss occurs, you either resist or you yield. Some people become bitter or deeply resentful; others become compassionate, wise, and loving. Yielding means inner acceptance of 'what is' (the 'here and now'). You are open to life.