Comments

1. Pedro says

   April 18, 2014 at 9:25 am

   Paul,

   I don’t know why your comments have compelled me to disgorge so much here, perhaps because I can understand where you’re coming from while knowing how much more lies ahead if you’d only take a stab at studying the LETTERS. For example “It is easier for a rich man to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven.” Well, this is Qabalah, for Gimmel with value 3 means camel, while Qof with value 100 means horizon or integration and its character is a P drawn just like the eye of a needle… Look at Aleph, the first letter. It has value one and means oxen, representing the unknowable ONE energy of life-death. The symbol expresses the “sword of union” and is comprised of Yod at upper right, the leg of Tav at lower left, and the connecting sword or Vav in the middle. Aleph is comprised of Aleph-Lammed-Phah Sophiyt. Lammed, value 30, means ox goad and is a physical action or motion. (Jesus age 30, Judas 30 pieces of silver, Samson 30 garments!!!!) Note that Tav is the last letter in the Hebrew alphabet (before Sophiyt glyphs), making the idea of Alpha and Omega come to mind… Does not Pah (mouth) look like a mouth with a tongue? Doesn’t Beyt look like a tent, which is its meaning? Beyt is comprised of Beyt-Yod-Tav, and it’s significant that Yod, or small fist, is contained within a tent (Beyt) and cosmic resistance, or Tav. Doesn’t Shiyn look like fire? Doesn’t Mem look like water? (Why then would Shem, or Shiyn-Mem be Hebrew for “name”? See how Mosheh or Moses begins with the Mem or water, and how his name, Mem-Shiyn-Hay contains the shem backwards – Shiyn-Mem becomes Mem-Shiyn) What does it mean that if you take the D or Dallet from Adam you get em, or mother? Look at the Tetragrammaton Yod-Hay-Vav-Hay, meaning Yod alive, Vav alive, or Existence Life Copulation Life, symbolizing the inner masculine and outer feminine connected by Vav, or male fertilizing agent. YHWH has a value 10.5.6.5 Knowing that Vav means connecting, this is an equation for 10=5+5, and 5 or Hay means life, each Hah being a hand with 5 fingers. What does it mean if you only use one of these hands as opposed to both? Or Yisrael being Yod-Shiyn-Reysh-Aleph-Lammed. Ish, or Yod-Shiyn means man, Reysh is means cosmic container, mind or universe, and El of course is what you’d say as “God”, which is Aleph-Lammed. Israel means ‘man is the cosmic container or mind of God.’ Look at Deuteronomy 6:4 in Hebrew: שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל: יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ, יְהוָה אֶחָד.

   The third character from the left in the Torah is larger and darker than the other letters (didin’t copy correctly here). That third character is Oyin with value 70 and means eyes or that which is visible. In this case it says LOOK! because the next word is Yisrael, whose meaning we need to understand. In English you get the following:

   Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

   But the Lord is actually Yod-Hay-Vav-Hay, this equation we need to understand, and while ‘one’ in English is nice, in Hebrew it is echad, which is the number of Aleph written in letters, echad being Aleph-Cheyt-Dallet, far more significant that a mere “one”….

   This is the language Yeshua spoke!

   The deepest secret in the world is right in front of you. However, while you can lead a horse to water, you can’t make him drink.

   “There are two narratives brilliantly woven together in the Bible and the Qur’an. There is a narrative of finite things, and there is a narrative of things found throughout the single infinite universe.
   The narrative of the finite includes mythology, allegory, parables, riddles, prohibitions, commandments etc. – concerning finite things, with words that refer to finite things with which we are familiar, such as mountains, kings, battles, cities, chariots, houses, people, etc. This is the story of Semitic scripture that we are familiar with.
   The narrative of the infinite is embedded within this narrative of the finite, in the letters of the same words.
   Whereas the narrative of the finite can be translated, more or less, into other languages, the narrative of the infinite is confined to the original language.”

   “Rabbi Meir, one of the most important teachers of the Mishnah [early part of the Talmud], relates: “When I was studying with Rabbi Akiba, I used to put vitriol in the ink and he said nothing. But when I went to Rabbi Ishmael, he asked me: My son, what is your occupation? I answered: I am a scribe [of the Torah]. And he said to me: My son, be careful in your work, for it is the work of God; if you omit a single letter, or write a letter too many, you will destroy the whole world…” – Gershom Scholem

   “… Bezalel knew how to combine the letters by which the heavens and the earth were created.”
   Talmud: tractate Berakoth 55a

   “He hath formed, weighed, transmuted, composed, and created with these twenty-two letters every living being, and every soul yet uncreated… …For He indeed showed the mode of combination of the letters, each with each, Aleph with all, and all with Aleph. Thus in combining all together in pairs are produced these two hundred and thirty-one gates of knowledge.”
   – Sepher Yetsira (around 2nd – 6th centuries AD)

   The Torah is likened to a nut by some Kabbalists. Just as a nut has an outer shell and an inner kernel, so too does the Torah. Moses de Leon used the acronym PaRDeS to denote four levels of meaning in the Torah:

   “…P stands for peshat, the literal meaning, R for remez, the allegorical meaning, D for derasha, the Talmudic and Aggadic interpretation, S for sod, the mystical meaning.” – Gershom Scholem

   “Alas for the man who regards the Torah as a book of mere tales and [everyday] matters. If this were so, we might even today write a Torah dealing in [everyday affairs] and still more excellent. In regard to earthly things, the kings and princes of the world possess more valuable materials. We could use them as a model for composing a Torah of this kind. But in reality the words of the Torah are higher words and higher mysteries…
   …When fools see a man in a garment that seems beautiful to them, they do not look more closely. But more important than the garment is the body, and more important than the body is the soul. So likewise the Torah has a body, which consists of the commandments and ordinances of the Torah, which are called gufe torah, (“bodies of the Torah”). This body is cloaked in garments, which consist of worldly stories. Fools see only the garment, which is the narrative part of the Torah; they know no more and fail to see what is under the garment. Those who know more see not only the garment but also the body that is under the garment. But the truly wise, the servants of the Supreme King, those who stood at the foot of Mount Sinai, [penetrate right through to the] soul, which is the true foundation of the entire Torah…
   …Wine cannot be kept save in a jar; so the Torah needs an outer garment. These are the stories and narratives, but it beho0ves us to penetrate beneath them.”
   – Rabbi Simeon in the Zohar – III 152a

   “Verily the Torah lets out a word and emerges a little from her sheath, and then hides herself again. But she does this only for those who know and obey her. For the Torah resembles a beautiful and stately damsel, who is hidden in a secluded chamber of her palace and who has a secret lover, unknown to all others. For love of her he keeps passing the gate of her house, looking this way and that in search of her. She knows that her lover haunts the gate of her house. What does she do? She opens the door of her hidden chamber ever so little, and for a moment reveals her face to her lover, but hides it again forthwith. Were anyone with her lover, he would see nothing and perceive nothing. He alone sees it and he is drawn to her with his heart and soul and his whole being, and he knows that for love of him she disclosed herself to him for one moment, aflame with love for him. So is it with the Torah, which reveals herself only to those who love her. The Torah knows that the mystic [hakim libba, literally, the wise of heart] haunts the gate of her house. What does she do? From within her hidden palace she discloses her face and beckons to him and returns forthwith to her place and hides. Those who are there see nothing and know nothing, only he alone, and he is drawn to her with his heart and soul and his whole being. Thus the Torah reveals herself and hides, and goes out in love to her lover and arouses love in him. Come and see: this is the way of the Torah. At first, when she wishes to reveal herself to a man, she gives him a momentary sign. If he understands, well and good; if not, she sends to him and calls him a simpleton. To the messenger she sends to him the Torah says: tell the simpleton to come here that I may speak to him. As it is written [Prov. 9:47]: ‘Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither, she saith to him that wanteth understanding.’ When he comes to her, she begins from behind a curtain to speak words in keeping with his understanding, until very slowly insight comes to him, and this is called derashah. [derashah means here the mode of interpretation practiced by the Talmudists, by which they derived the exoteric oral doctrine from the words of Scripture in accordance with certain fixed norms] Then through a light veil she speaks allegorical words [millin de hida] and that is what is meant by haggadah. Only then, when he has become familiar with her, does she reveal herself to him face to face and speak to him of all her hidden secrets and all her hidden ways, which have been in her heart from the beginning. Such a man is then termed perfect, a ‘master’, that is to say, a ‘bridegroom of the Torah’ in the strictest sense, the master of the house, to whom she discloses all her secrets, concealing nothing. She says to him: do you see now how many mysteries were contained in that sign I gave you on the first day, and what its true meaning is? Then he understands that to those words indeed nothing may be added and nothing taken away. And then for the first time he understands the true meaning of the words of the Torah, as they stand there, those words to which not a syllable or a letter may be added and from which none may be taken away. And therefore men should take care to pursue the Torah [that is, study it with great precision], in order to become her lovers as has been related.”
   – Zohar, II, 99a-b

   “Just as in the body of a man there are limbs and joints, just as some organs of the body are more, others less, vital, so it seems to be with the Torah. To one who does not understand their hidden meaning, certain sections and verses of the Torah seem fit to be thrown into the fire; but to one who has gained insight into their true meaning they seem essential components of the Torah. Consequently, to omit so much as one letter or point from the Torah is like removing some part of a perfect edifice. Thence it also follows that in respect of its divine character no essential distinction can be drawn between the section of Genesis 36, setting forth the generations of Esau [a seemingly superfluous passage], and the Ten Commandments, for it is all one whole and one edifice.”
   – Rabbi Azriel of Gerona (1160 – 1238 AD)

   Reply

2. Pedro says

   April 18, 2014 at 9:29 am

   Deuteronomy 6:4 I meant Oyin as third character from right…

   Reply

3. Robert says

   April 18, 2014 at 10:15 am

   Paul,

   It occurred to me while rereading some comments in this post when I was in a relatively calm state of mind, that your path has taken you into the experience of Eastern spirituality for quite some time, and then back to the bible. I am wondering why you left Eastern spirituality. Did you find it incomplete? In returning to the bible, were you looking for something less amorphous and more concrete? Something where truth is finally pinned down to an infrastructure of words. I’m trying to see your path through your eyes.

   I’ve read accounts of westerners who were Buddhists for a long time and then became fundamentalist Christians and who now swear by the truth of the bible scriptures.

   I noticed you have had experience with people who meditate and had bad behavior. Have events like this made you question Eastern religion?

   Many of the SOS group started out from biblical backgrounds, became disillusioned with the dogmatic, judgmental, robotized practice of it, and searched for something else. I know that I have had experience with scripture-based Christian leaders who had screws loose and disguised it with charm and pontification.

   So perhaps we have parallel experiences of disillusionment, me going from west to east, and you going from east to west.

   What do you think?

   Reply

   • Paul says

     April 19, 2014 at 10:58 am

     Robert:

     I can’t tell you how much I appreciate this question. It is soooo much better to come to an understanding of someone by simply asking him/her, than it is to make unfounded assumptions and form critical and snap judgments without knowledge.

     Actually, I think my story to be pretty interesting. However, for purposes of space and time, I’m going to give you the short version here. I am working on my “About Me” page on my website (http://www.decodingscripture.com). And have begun my story there. Please feel free to look at that for additional information, with the understanding that there is more to come.

     I thoroughly enjoyed my time studying Vedanta. I learned so much that it was incredible. I was “initiated” into spiritual life in Maryland in 2002 by Swami Swahananda of the Greater Vedanta Society of Southern California. I have since renounced that initiation with the belief that we need no human gurus to guide us spiritually. We have an internal “guru” that does that.

     I was never completely disillusioned with Eastern Spirituality. I studied the Bhagavad Gita for eight years. In the first chapter, God gives Arjuna a mission, and Arjuna gets excited about the mission until he finds out the subjects of his mission. He is told to go the battlefield and fight. He was eager to do this until he finds out who he has to fight. It was all his relatives. His heart sinks.

     There are sects of Indian culture that take this story literally. Vedanta, however, does not. After studying the Bhagavad Gita for eight years, I had an epiphany. What if the Bible is written the same way the Baghavad Gita was. What if all I had ever been taught about the Bible all my life was wrong, and that the Bible is not a book to be taken literally.

     It is with this thought that I set out to study it on my own, without teachers, without mentors, without any external research — something I had never, ever done. I wanted to find out for myself, and so I set out to study it independently. Along the way mysteries that have plagued Christianity for centuries were starting to become so plain to me. I started understanding things that I knew no one else understood. What is so amazing to me about all this is that some of the conclusions that I came to about it lined up with the esoteric schools of thought, and I had no idea that there even were esoteric schools of thought in existence as it relates to the Bible. I truly lived a sheltered life as it related to the Bible. However, growing up as a Jehovah’s Witness, one immediately understands this sheltered life.

     The more I began to understand, the more I began to realize that this could possibly be my mission in life — to help explain to the fundamentalists what this book is really saying to us. Along the way I began to understand that my need for religion as I knew it had expired, that the training wheels could not come off, and that I did not need man to teach me anything else about it. If you notice, I do not quote men in my explanations of scripture. This is because I neither depend on men, nor seek the advice of men. ALL of my questions regarding the scriptures I take inside. Some things come right away, while others have literally taken years to unfold. However it works, I wait for understanding, rather than to force the issue. I have been astounded at what I have learned and discovered, and putting it into practice, it works for me.

     Of course, men wrote the Bible, but what makes it so different for me (along with ALL of the scriptures of the world, ALL of which are written by men), is that it is written in such a way that it is left open to interpretation (witness the over 14,000 denominations under Christianity alone, not to mention other schools of thought that study it). I absolutely love looking into it and gleaning its spiritual truths, which are incredible when understood accurately. I seek to share the understandings I have gained from it with people who may have an interest in it. If people disagree with me, that is their privilege, and since I am not God himself (that “God” is in each one of us), I have absolutely no problem with that. My greatest encouragement of people is to do what I have done, and that is to go inside and get the information for yourself. Cease going to man for your understandings, advice, instruction, etc. Flee from the crowd and dwell with the Christ within you, which is your hope of glory.

     In general, I no longer believe in organized religion. Nor do I believe or look at some men as God (as I once did with Swami Vivekananda and Sri Ramakrishna), which many religious people do with their pastors, ministers, etc. It isn’t because I was disillusioned with anything, but more that I simply learned that all that wasn’t really necessary. God is within us, and at this point in my life, I refuse to commit adultery with man. We can never find our power doing that. In fact, that is what the scriptures call the “abomination that causes desolation.”

     I hope I answered your questions adequately for you. Let me know if I have not.

     Thanks, Robert.

     Reply

     • Paul says

       April 19, 2014 at 11:11 am

       “that the training wheels could now come off”

       Reply

     • Robert says

       April 20, 2014 at 12:03 am

       Paul,

       Ah. So you were the bible verse champion and teacher at a Baptist church, after having taken the tour from JW to Holiness/Pentecostal. Your bio and the rest of your website are written very, very well. I sincerely believe every miracle you described, including finding spiritual direction from a message on a bar of soap. Have you ever considered how symbolic that is to find truth on a bar of soap instead of say, a cereal box top. You learned to meditate. Then you spent eight years studying Vedanta literature which introduced you to the idea that scriptures are better understood by treating them as allegorical. Then you started to apply that principle to the bible, and it opened up a whole new world of understanding that you discovered was similar to that of esoteric schools, being guided each step of the way by your instincts and a bar of soap, independently from external suggestion from others. That is so incredible and totally validating for the rest of us. What a trek. Well that explains a lot. Wow.

       I should apologize for being so taken aback by your concentrated use of scripture . You know scripture by heart so well, to you it is an old friend. Also you are experienced in teaching by using the scriptural exegesis style of presentation. I plead guilty with explanation. I put up my defenses when I come across anything resembling that style because it reminds me that it was used by all the denominations who misled me and I still haven’t gotten over it. But I will have to remind myself that you are using scriptures for a different intent. And I am going to have to get over my immature anger at being misled. I was blind, but now I see.

       Evenso, I’d still suggest considering revising your style. I think Josh sets a good precedent for style because it avoids all manner of seeming pedagogical. But, of course, you have to be you and find you own voice. I’m thinking that setting off the scripture so abruptly from the rest of your narrative using such drastically different formatting interrupts the continuity of your message. Its’ a visual thing and gives me a headache. So I want to skip over the special formatting and get back to your skilled, free-flowing narrative. It also implies that the literal scripture by itself is more authoritative than your explanation of it, and it defeats your intent of focusing on the allegorical meaning. Further, once you have made your point, the frequent use of additional multiple literal applications of scripture after the fact to compare, contrast and support your point is easily misunderstood as using the authority of literal scripture to prove the allegorical meaning. Spock would say this is illogical and circular reasoning. Bones would say “My God, Robert, stop knee-jerking and give the guy a chance”. Counselor Troy would suggest that using the old style that resembles pedagogical teaching may, by association, subconsciously and inadvertently reawaken the habit of being, in fact, pedagogical which then leaks through. Scotty would say “I can’t hold the reactor anymore, Captain. Too much literal and anti-literal matter mixed together. It’s gonna blow.”

       Anyway. That’s my suggestion for you to make it easier for me. I will try to compensate for my knee-jerking to accommodate you. Fair?

       Reply

       • Paul says

         April 20, 2014 at 10:24 am

         Robert, it has indeed been quite an incredible trek.

         It has been said that we don’t see the world as it is, we see the world as WE are. I completely understand that your reservations regarding my use of the scriptures stems from your association with them.

         I think I mentioned in a previous post that the combination of your’s and Pedro’s critiques regarding my use of scriptures have give me pause to consider each of your points of view. But in my consideration of them, I must also take into consideration my relatively small subscriber base on my YouTube channel, many of whom love the way I use them and am able to link the allegorical/metaphorical meanings to them.

         You can’t please everybody, as of course you know. Perhaps my style is meant to be geared to a particular audience. Or perhaps I need to develop more of a personal style without scriptural references, while being able to explain, when asked, how I come to my conclusions on a particular subject. I actually like the idea of the second point, but I am currently giving LOTS of thought to your critique, and I thank you for being consistent in advancing it. I’m not promising that I’m going to change it, but I’m not saying that I’m not, either. Ultimately, I’m going to let my spirit dictate to me how I should handle this, and then proceed accordingly. That ALWAYS works for me. 😉

         Thanks so much for your comments overall (and ALL your comments). Obviously, as a scientist, you are keen in your attention to detail. That is a trait that I personally admire.

         Reply

         • anny says

           April 20, 2014 at 11:57 am

           Hi Paul,

           All you guys sure know how to keep me occupied this Easter Sunday, with the comments alone!

           I’ll still get back to you on your article, Paul, I have to read it again quietly, but I must say that in general I more or less feel the same as Robert does about the many quotes. Is it not possible to put them underneath your articles as footnotes, so everyone who wants to read them can do so at their leisure but they will not interrupt the explanation itself?

           Maybe you can make different versions, with quotes for your You Tube channel and without (with footnotes) for articles? Just a thought.

           Anny

           Reply

         • Robert says

           April 20, 2014 at 2:54 pm

           Paul,

           Thank you for your considerate reply. If your You Tube is a video with the major part of the presentation in audio, then that is a game changer, because audio provides pacing and voice inflection that overrules the organization, emphasis, and visual formatting on the written page. It’ one thing to read lyrics, and another thing to hear the song. So your original intent may come across much more strongly through your voice, and the scripture references feed more harmoniously into it. I don’t have a link to your YouTube to really check that out. It might have been in a different post, but I’m not sure.

           And I agree, that after considering feedback from others, it is important to listen to the guidance within. I have a lot of respect for that decision.

           Reply

         • Robert says

           April 20, 2014 at 2:59 pm

           Anny,

           Good to know you are out there watching. Sparks said you are a grandmother now. Glad you chimed in.

           Reply

         • Paul says

           April 22, 2014 at 10:34 am

           Anny, Robert and Pedro:

           I truly appreciate your comments regarding my concentrated use of scriptures. My spirit is speaking to me very strongly about this subject, and your comments have been a tremendous blessing in this regard.

           Here’s the link to my YouTube channel:

           https://www.youtube.com/user/DecodingScriptures

           I currently have five videos uploaded, and am considering (not sure I’m going to do it yet) uploading a sixth (the video for this article), which I have already prepared and just need to upload.

           Reply

4. Robert says

   April 18, 2014 at 2:07 pm

   Pedro,

   My appreciation for Kabbalah is from the outside looking in. The last thing I ever wanted to do in life is sit under an old Rabbi for six years of sequential, exhausting lessons without much to show for it. I’ve tried online lessons for the Jewish Kabbalah twice and given up after three hours of boring pedagogical instruction. I visited two Chasidic synagogues a few times and was repelled by dogma and liturgy, but my wife liked the schnapps and kept dragging me. I don’t know if they taught Gematria there. Maybe I only saw the out face, and not the inner wisdom. I don’t know.

   I did not appreciate the Conservative synagogue I grew up in and was barmitzvahed. I’m not that impressed by Reform temples I have visited. The closest I have come to identifying with my Jewish identity has been my experience with Messianic Judaism, which I still participate in largely because it brings stability to my wife and our marriage.

   I have taken a look at the non-Jewish Kabbalah …Golden Dawn, but not in much depth.

   When I look up Kabbalah and Pardes on Wikipedia, the S is described as hidden mystical meaning that is usually not contradictory to the three exoteric (P,R,D) meanings. I am certain the Wikipedia is only as accurate as the bias of the people who submit information to it, but represents views that are generally accepted.

   Your esoteric application of gematria to interpret your version of S seems to be chock full of contradictions to P, R, D. Cain is the good guy, etc. And then extended into the NT, Judas is the good guy.

   It would help me a lot to better understand your perspective if you described your background, how you came to study Kabbalah and gematria, and which sources you studied under (people, schools, books, websites, other resources, etc).

   I have seen gematria used in many different ways to come up with very different doctrines on various websites. I think Josh’s post on the Tetragammeton has a somewhat different drift than yours, obtained from different sources.

   I thought if I had difficulties fully understanding your perspective, it might help if I looked at your sources. My eyesight and concentration when reading is not that perfect, so I am not a veracious reader who likes to wade through volumes and volumes of books. I know the Hebrew alphabet and can read Hebrew without actually understanding it. I’m good at math. Maybe there is a resource you can recommend. Maybe what I am looking for is “Pedro’s Kabbalah for the Complete Idiot.”

   In your discussion with Paul about suffering, I think I tend to want to find a happy medium in between. I can’t ignore the suffering of others, but I can approach that problem more sanely when I am not riddled with anxiety and negativity.

   I would have to be honest about disagreeing with your statement about charity being ineffective. Sometimes it is when all it does is perpetuate the problem by cultivating excessive dependence on it. But, you cannot teach someone to fish if they are about to starve to death, don’t have limbs, or they have been traumatized to the point of becoming dysfunctional. I think the parable of the Good Samaritan may have a lot meaning by itself which addresses this. I have found myself on the wrong side of this parable on occasion, and it often opens my heart and brings me back.

   Reply

5. Pedro says

   April 18, 2014 at 3:38 pm

   I’ve said more than enough and pointed to countless names and ideas worth inspecting, though every pointer leads to you and no one else. Subject and object are ONE. This ought to explain my stance on suffering and many other issues. By the way Paul, Adam and Eve (Cheva) aren’t people, nor is Qayin or Hevel (Cain and Abel). “Sin” and “curse” are nowhere to be found in the Bible, but hey, go on drinking your milk and wearing a white mustache. Qayin is my hero. Judas too…

   As bees suck nectar from many a flower
   And make their honey one, so that no drop
   Can say, ‘I am from this flower or that,’
   All creatures, though one, know not that they are that One.

   – Chandogya Upanishad

   “I will show you fear in a handful of dust.” – T.S. Eliot

   Today is a good day to die, no? If only you die to your idea of death…for every branch, twig and leaf that falls from a tree to the ground becomes fertilizer for the roots to grow and give life to new buds…

   Time to make like a tree and leave…

   Reply

   • Paul says

     April 19, 2014 at 11:27 am

     Pedro, Pedro, Pedro.

     I am so sorry that you choose to disparage what you don’t understand, choosing to make snap judgments and false assumptions. However, that is your choice. There is no need to engage me in anymore of these types of discussions, as it just seems to inflame you, and forces me into a corner where I have to figure out the best way to respond. I have no interest in any of this. It is all ego at its greatest.

     To make a long story short, I am really not at all interested in all your verbiage. You seem to have much knowledge about a lot of things, and it is obvious that you are well-versed. You are a brilliant young man. However, that is not what spirituality is all about. You speak well about a lot of things, but your actions contradict your words to the extreme.

     Your last major comment was extremely complicated for me, and much more than I am capable of digesting without spending an inordinate amount of time and energy. What I do, and the approach that I take, works for me. If what I am doing for me doesn’t work for you, that’s just not a consideration for me. So I will drink my milk and wear my white moustache very proudly.

     Blessings, my brother!

     Reply

     • Robert says

       April 19, 2014 at 2:36 pm

       Paul,

       Oops. You let it get to you. I understand exactly how you feel, especially if you thought Pedro’s last comment was addressed to you. An easy mistake to make. But this particular comment from Pedro was actually addressing my post just above it. So don’t take it so personally.

       I’m thinking perhaps there is a disconnect somewhere, maybe in the way I express myself or in the way Pedro perceives it, which sparked his defensive response. Or maybe it is an automatic conditioned response that seems normal to Pedro but irritating to us. Or he could have had a BP moment. I’m speculating of course. We really don’t know. And we should assume. There are perhaps 39 possible reasons for a response like his. Jesus said not to judge and to tolerate what we perceive as offensive behavior 7 x 70 times. I found this very hard to do as a fundamentalist. I didn’t have any tools to achieve this expectation. I found that mindfulness helped, jumping into observer mode and just watching I’m finding that Raymond’s teaching about Bliss Consciousness even more helpful.

       From my point of view, which I’m fairly certain that for one reason or other did get through to Pedro, is that if he is going to claim that other people’s suffering is not important, and that it is not our responsibility to help the helpless, then I’m not going to accept that unless he has a really good explanation for that, which I can swallow. So far he has presented a very private interpretation of the meaning of the Tetragrammaton that is still not clear to me after several rounds of explanation (and I am not dense, at least the committee that granted my PHD in Chemistry 28 years ago didn’t think so). He has also presented a scattering of quotes from various well-known people, which have profound meaning, but not regarding the issue of suffering (and I seriously doubt if there is a single person quoted who would agree with Pedro’s response to suffering). Perhaps in Pedro’s mind he believes he has presented a good case and feels offended that I would probe and ask for his background, history, and for him to recommend references which would back him up on the suffering issue and his interpretation of the Tetragrammaton. I’m not stupid enough to be totally indiscreet, so I can’t allow myself to say everything I think about this, even if to myself I am somewhat certain of it. That would be jumping to conclusions, judging, and potentially damaging, and making an negative asset of myself. The best I can do is shut up (which as you can see, is not always easy for me) and think about how funny you would look in a white moustache.

       Reply

       • Paul says

         April 20, 2014 at 9:03 am

         Hi Robert.

         Look at the sentence that begins on the third line of his last comment in this string and you will see whom he is addressing. It was personal, and I had to think long and hard before responding to it. There is a spiritual principle that I invoked in responding. It was this:

         (4) Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. (5) Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit. (Prov. 26:4-5)

         Please understand I am NOT calling Pedro a fool. But this spiritual principle illustrates my quandary as to whether I should respond, or not respond. I made absolutely no judgment of him in my response (in fact, all my comments about him were positive), but merely told him how his comment affected me. I read my response about ten or more times before I actually posted it, because I wanted to be very careful and not say things by which the readers of SOS would be offended. Not sure whether or not I actually accomplished that. I thought about getting his email address from Josh and addressing him personally, and perhaps that may have been the better course of action (“tell your brother his fault between you and him alone, and if he hears you, you have gained your brother”), but I have no regrets doing it the way I did.

         We are all still in learning and growing mode, and we are all still progressing through the seven days of creation on our way to spiritual perfection.

         Reply

6. Robert says

   April 18, 2014 at 5:38 pm

   Pedro,

   Even though I can’t understand your perspective right now the way you do, we are still one.

   Reply

7. Robert says

   April 18, 2014 at 6:27 pm

   Pedro,

   I found this on another website:

   “Tell me and I forget, teach me and I may remember, involve me and I learn.” ~ Benjamin Franklin

   The mind needs to be actively creating in order to make new connections and pathways, to grow and expand. Passive receptivity doesn’t cut it.

   Reply

8. Brian says

   April 18, 2014 at 6:54 pm

   Is the suffering I perceive in a third party victim, his suffering or mine or both?

   Clearly the suffering of a third party victim is not the same as the suffering within the mind of the compasionate observer, although it is easy for the compassionate person to belive that he feels what his fellow human being is feeling. Isn’t that a large part of what we mean by compassion? I will journey with you in your pain.

   But what is the victim really experiencing? Pain? Yes, in part. But part of the human experience is the intention to avoid the pain, by way of self-help strategies, which may or may not work. Redemption means a successful exit and frustration accrues to a repeated failure to escape the source of ones pain.

   So, what should the compassionate person do to help ones suffering neighbour? Is welfare a help or a hindrance to the dsire to help oneself?

   Religion seems to serve up quite a few remedies, such as the protestant work ethic (GOYA), Christian grace, Budhist abandonment of all desire, and a call to God to smite our enemies which quite a few religions seem to share in common.

   To add to this confusing mix, we have the reality that we easily lose sight of just how much we interpret our perceptions of what we refer to as reality. We regularly see what our internal abstractions of reality tell us should be there, even though we are unaware that we are abstracting our perceptions, at the speed of thought.

   For example, look out your window and try to see what is there without using language. How quickly does our mind convert that infinite collection of colours, shapes, etc into the word “tree”? To take a more complex example, when you look at my mother, you see a woman. I see a complex mixture of interacting life experiences. Such is the complexity of human perception.

   And as soon as we convert all that sensory detail into an abstract word, we lose all that detail. From that point on, everything we “saw” out the window is our abstraction, rather than the real thing. Some even suggest that there is no real thing, apart from our abstract thoughts.

   Religious ritual seems to me to deliberately exploit this weakness in perception via various induced altered states of consciousness, as in speaking in tongues, or even simply talking to a God that may well not exist outside our imagination.

   It is certainly a heady brew of confusion which most of us experience as normal consciousness. Try telling a true believer that his god may only be an idea in his head; albeit a very helpful idea. People get murdered for such insults.

   To return to our suffering victim, who ultimately is either going to be redeemed or else remain mired in his suffering. The mechanics of welfare remain debatable; fish versus fishing rods, etc. But beyond that, our perceptions of the course of our neighbour’s suffering are far less reliable than we think.

   Should we therefore just give up and let our suffering neighbour simply sink or swim? No, our inner feelings of compassion, if they are real to us, should not be ignored; definitely not. But we do need to be humble in assessing how much real help we can be to our neighbour in his hour of need. Conversely, how helpful can he really be to us? How much redemption arises from fighting the good fight?

   Grace is a very appealing imaginary source of salvation when we are suffering. But it is only an idea promoted by a group, who may have ulterior motives. How do you salvage a messiah who was murdered as an enemy of the state? You might add bits to the story; like grace as a struggle-free redemption from suffering.

   Just remember that these are all just ideas in your head. That doesn’t stop them being useful. But when it comes to judging their utility, the buck stops with you.

   You have to own all those abstracted ideas that we call consciousness. You must own your map of reality, if only because it is uniquely yours for the duration of your life on earth. Don’t outsource it to anyone, whatever their self proclaimed, ecclesiastical expertise may be.

   That does not mean that you canot include a fantasy or two, like grace or even an interventionist God, if it helps.

   The important point is that you own your map. And if there is a universal power beyond our current understanding, it probably lies within this map within your consciousness. Treat it with the greatest of care. Ego is not a dirty word, unless you choose to imagine it is.

   Reply

   • Paul says

     April 19, 2014 at 11:56 am

     Brian:

     In general, I agree with your comment. As human beings, we are usually obsessed with other people’s opinions about things. But what is YOUR spirit speaking to YOU? Connecting with the inner power is a very difficult endeavor, but if we are to ultimately succeed at it, it will be because we stay with it until it happens. “He who endures to the end shall be saved,” is the spiritual principle I would apply to this.

     We must learn to divorce ourselves from the opinions/beliefs/perceptions/suggestions of others. It is just common sense that we can never find out what truly lies inside of us constantly looking at what is outside of us. If you’re making a left turn while looking right, you have no idea what’s on your left. The longer you are looking in the direction you are traveling, the more clearly you can see in that direction.

     It is all so confusing. Go to the Internet. Go to the library. Read this book. Watch that video. Listen to this teacher. Follow this minister. This is what this one has to say, etc.

     And then we’re miserable and frustrated because we doesn’t know which way to turn. Of course all of this is confusing. We all have the ability to make our own way. Isn’t it incumbent upon us to begin to form our OWN thoughts, our OWN perceptions, generate our OWN feelings, seek our OWN way, and stop the sheep-like following of other men who are not one iota greater than we are, no matter what their station in life?

     “If you over-esteem great men, people become powerless.” The Tao – 3

     Reply

     • Robert says

       April 19, 2014 at 4:03 pm

       Paul,

       I totally agree with you on the confusion from too many teachers. I was feeling that last week. But then a connection came along that pulled me right out of it.

       Before I started to develop and trust my intuition, I used to think theological debates were like watching a ping pong match, siding first with one side, and then with the other until everything became muddy.

       Now I’ve discovered that muddiness can be an advantage, because when a teaching is truly benefiting you, you can tell the difference. It makes a connection. You arise from the mud and more eagerly follow the path toward the light. It’s the one for you and the one you have been waiting for.

       Might even be a path you turned away from before, because you were not ready to go there yet.

       Reply

       • Paul says

         April 20, 2014 at 9:29 am

         You know, your comment makes me think of the Bill Nye/Ken Ham debates, which I viewed with avid interest. The ego part of me would love to get my hands in this debate, because I believe I am able to present information and an understanding from which the scientists (I am on the science side of the debate) could truly benefit. Biblical earth has nothing to do with this round globe on which we live, and the first chapter of Genesis actually makes this crystal clear, but we don’t see it simply because of what have been conditioned to see.

         I love the conclusion you come to at the end of your comment, and I agree with you 100%. Your last sentence reminds of my own journey.

         Reply

         • Robert says

           April 20, 2014 at 4:38 pm

           Paul,

           We have a lot in common. I was born in Brooklyn, raised in Queens. Part of the beginning of my spiritual journey happened in graduate school in Ohio when I was being evangelized by a group of JW one summer. At that time I knew zilch about the NT. I didn’t have a clue what XX:yy,zz (KJV) meant. The JWs were a young group of relatives who took care of each other and were very friendly and warm. They knocked on my door and seemed a lot less phony than the Mormons, and so we had some great theological discussions, which went well for them because I didn’t know anything, I was all ears, and they didn’t carry or wear any crosses or claim that Jesus was God, which would have greatly stirred up my underlying fear of Christians being anti-Semites. They explained to me what fellowship was, and I liked it. Looking back at that time, they were not pushing Revelations and the end times, because I think this was just after the JW claims that the end would come in 1975 had crashed. They had a lot to explain about why their bible was different than the KJV, but they had to back track first and introduce me to the KJV. It was all very interesting until I was intuitively puzzled by their attempts to explain the concept of grace. I could tell they were hardworking evangelists, and there was something very serious and rigid about their doctrine, and they explained the very hierarchal structure of the Kingdom Hall, and they had various ranks according to how successful they were evangelizing. None of this corresponded to the glimpse I got of grace, and salvation being a free gift of God, from the scriptures they read me. In my innocence and lack of programming, I intuitively sensed a contradiction between this new concept of grace and what they were living. They called in the higher level experts but it did not resolve. Then when the term started up again in the Fall, I met a lone ranger Christian in the cafeteria who explained the Messianic prophecies and had a better handle on grace. I said the sinners prayer and started my journey as a Christian. I started going to a Baptist bible study and then to a Baptist church. When I ran into my JW friends a month after that, I was all excited to tell them, and I was shocked at their reaction. They were devastated. I never knew there could be such a denomination boundary like this. They were a loving bunch of fellowshipping JWs, but they dropped me.

           That started my search for Jesus the Messiah, from one denomination to another to try to find the truth. Charismatic. Word of Life. Church of Christ. Lutheran. Presbyterian, Pentacostal, Methodist. School of Prophecy. I visited a black Holiness church one time. I was often led by friends, often girlfriends. I read all the different translations, consulted the mainline commentaries, went to conferences by Benny Hinn, Knneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, until one day I found a Messianic Jewish group and felt some of the alienation of feeling like a an orangutan in pack of gorillas dissipate. My wife of 15 years and I have the Messianic heritage in common. I still wasn’t satisfied though. I tried a few other groups, like Hebrew Roots with mixed results and met Josh at one of them. We both left that group but stayed in contact, and through the email he introduced me to the esoteric world and meditation that he was beginning to explore.

           One thing I have often noticed in all the different denominations I have followed, is that when I devoted myself to bible study and prayer, that I would sometime become drawn to an issue or scripture in my private time, verses that seemed to stand out from the page, and then would show up in other places, and then the next Sunday the issue would be part of the Sermon. It didn’t matter whether I liked the preacher or not, or if the denomination was wacky. This was an amazing phenomenon and still occurs in the most unexpected places, even when my wife turns on the TV evangelists who I think are con artists. I guess this has something to do with the scripture about the rocks crying out if no one speaks the truth, or the story of the false prophet Balaam and enemy of Israel prophesying under the anointing in Israel’s favor. Perhaps the Cosmic light shines its way into the lower corrupted realms in whatever way it can.

           Reply

         • Paul says

           April 22, 2014 at 10:13 am

           This is pretty amazing, Robert. I was born in Brooklyn (Brooklyn Jewish Hospital) and spent my teenage years (11-17 years of age) in St. Albans (197th Street and Hollis Avenue), before moving to Far Rockaway very briefly at the age of 17, and circling back to Washington Heights, Manhattan (158th and Riverside) shortly thereafter. Small world, isn’t it?

           Your experiences with JW accurately describes the group as a whole. I am completely convinced that we don’t truly understand Divine Love. It is a concept that I believe is outside the grasp of human nature. It is easy to love those that love you, but loving those that may not love you back, and especially if they are actually hating you, is exponentially more difficult. It’s easy to give up on those who don’t do what we want them to do, as the JWs did with you once you jumped ship. It’s why marriages fail, why people leave churches, why friends part ways, why parents and children separate as the children get older, etc. I believe it is the single greatest source of human conflict — this desire for others to do what WE want them to do. The best of human love leaves much to be desired.

           The last paragraph of your comment is pretty phenomenal, because my experience is the same. I would imagine that if we all would pay attention, we would all see similar experiences. I don’t believe they are an accident. The scriptures counsel us to “watch and pray.” Not just to pray, but to “watch.” You obviously are watching. What I have learned to do is to take my questions regarding these kinds of phenomena inside, and I do more watching, and I notice more “revelations.”

           What this does for me is prove the existence of “God”; NOT the external God, but the Christ WITHIN me. Scripture tells us to “prove all things.” In counseling us to pay our tithes (and this has nothing to do with money), the admonition is to “prove me now herewith.” Indeed the existence of God within us can be proven. Individually, this is what we all must do, as no one can give anyone personal experience of these things. We must find them out for ourselves.

           So do you think you have found “Jesus” yet?

           Reply

         • Robert says

           April 22, 2014 at 12:14 pm

           Paul,

           In answer to your question about “finding Jesus”, I would say that in the past I fulfilled all the various denomination requirements for being a follower of the anthropomorphic representation, the Christ incarnate, associated with the NT narrative. I had what is usually described as a “personal relationship” being guided by biblical principles, denominational guidelines and teaching, and the inaudible voice or promptings attributed to the spirit of Christ and the Holy Sprit. I prayed in tongues and various types of prayers and groining’s in English. I sometimes observed that I was rewarded through whatever channel I gave myself to others. But there was a lot missing in being fulfilled and church people were sometimes saints and sometimes utter wackos. I think they had a taste of a drop in the bucket of spirituality and mistook that drop for the bucket, and used that drop as the miracle proof that they had fully arrived at all truth. But when you have lived in a desert, one drop can go a long way.

           Today when I go to a church, tune in to the TV or a website, I am able to draw in some useable spirituality, that edifies myself and that I can use to edify others, but find myself continually reassessing the old semblance of truths that were taught, and sometimes even frightened by how confident preachers are in their beliefs in what I know to be mere shadows and contaminated versions of something more true.

           What has changed since I started meditation and mindfulness two years ago, is that I am able when I will it, to become acutely aware of my ego and the egotistical behavior of others.

           In the past I used to try to rely on the magic of the Holy Spirit to make me more like Jesus, according to his description and teachings in the NT. Some things I could manage to do right, but with a lot of pride and righteous indignation. And the biggest things I barely had success with. So I pretended to be something I was not, but something inside me knew I wasn’t cutting it, other’s like me weren’t cutting it, and I wasn’t happy.

           Meditation and mindfulness awakened something new… a tool that made it easier to be non-judgmental, turn the other cheek, slow to speak and fast to listen, helped to see the best path that would benefit everyone all around, and to recognize the promptings of the divine more accurately. I could see the same redemptive influence in many other religions. I could “find Jesus”, the spirit of enlightenment, inside me and a part of others whose beliefs the church had judged unfit and in need of conversion, even humanists.

           In the last three months I have been sorting through many philosophies and spiritual systems. I could find faults in all of them and even with what I currently followed. Too many paths, too much guess work, too much uncertainty. At the beginning of April, I had a realization that the only thing that always made sense was love. That was the light, and everything else was unreliable. If I could do that and get that right, there would always be success no matter what. At the same time, I realized that the love aspect was my weakest area, so that was what I had to shoot for. I knew my inadequacies. I just wasn’t sure how to fix them Then , post about Job and love came out about a week later. I guess in retrospect what I found frustrating in your post was that it exhorted the virtue of love, which is a good thing to do because Job is not just about the sovereignty of God, but it did not show me how to love any differently than what I had already been exposed to. It did remind me to trust, like Job, that no matter what conditions we are in, even if everything did not make sense or the solution seemed out of reach, there is a higher power working without and within us to bring us higher, and to keep reaching for it. The Raymond’s post clued me in to bliss consciousness. Never heard of it before. I did some more research on it and found an article that suggested you did not have to necessarily practice a rigorous discipline to find it, but simply relax and let it happen. I tried that and it worked. I also found that bliss consciousness is a source of energy and courage that allows a person to love more perfectly and to dispel fear. I can only visit that consciousness right now. But I think we are destined to live there more continuously, even in the midst of Job’s trials.

           So did I “find Jesus”? The short answer was yes, his initials are on my shirt. The more accurate answer is that what is underneath the shirt is still seeking and finding.

           Reply

         • Paul says

           April 24, 2014 at 7:24 am

           This search for who we are is an absolutely fascinating journey. We will all get there. In fact, I believe we are all already there, we just need our eyes opened so that we can see it. I believe this to be the meaning of Jesus healing the blind and opening the ears of the deaf. There is nothing new under the sun. The “Christ” just opens our eyes to what is already there.

           Reply

9. Robert says

   April 19, 2014 at 8:34 am

   Brian,

   In my experience, I haven’t based my learning of appreciation of grace and compassion for the suffering on intellectual probing of hypothetical situations. Compassion for suffering is a biological given, especially for the ones that are closest to you, like your child or spouse. Life provides multitudes of opportunities to be rescued and to rescue. If my dog starts to limp, I take her to the vet. It’s a no brainer. She knows when I am sad and consoles me with her body language and tongue. There are no filters of reality in play there. No fishing rods. No ego, no non-ego.

   If someone does you a good turn without expecting anything in return, it’s natural to catch on and do the same for them or someone else at a later time. Goodness promotes goodness. There is nothing to analyze or debate. Human kindness is as basic biologically as one’s kidneys. It’s how we survive together.

   Reply

   • Brian says

     April 19, 2014 at 1:29 pm

     I agree with you, Robert; up to a point.

     The experience of generous compassion is indeed joyful, to the point of feeling instinctive. Many believe that helping our fellow beings is also a postive evolutionary force. And yes it certainly feels good.

     But why ban the intellect from the process?

     And yes there are reality filters at work, a lot of the time. For instance, I too am a dog lover. When the chips are down he feels like this loving caring, companion. But that is mostly in my head. In reality, I am a source of his survival and more immediately, there is a better than average chance that tonight I will feed him. The rest is my fantasy; albeit a seemingly harmless one.

     Same with friends and family; mostly cultural fantasy. Again this is not to say that these notions of loving bonds are not powerful and useful. But at their foundation, you will surely find a fantasy that reality can evapourate like snowflakes in the morning sun.

     Such is life and perhaps our only defence against being unbearably alone is to create shared fantasies; to share a religion.

     But even so, why leave out our human intellect; the reality that the human mind is more powerful than the dog mind? Why black ban the ego from all this fantasy-making?

     For a start, these fantasies do have some very real limits. Even the three act play eventually ends. The curtain falls and we are suddenly forced to face the end of the dream. And I guess the dream of an ethereal comforter as a panacaea to our basic aloneness is as good as any.

     But why not risk an intellectual exploration of the whole process of suffering and grief? Our religious fantasies are far from perfect and at times they are downright dangerous. Yes, helping one another feels good, but at other times, our fantasies can become just as dark and gruesome. And often our most loving intentions are anything but helpful; much less reciprocated. Fantasy is such a short term fix. (Religion claims to fix everything for the whole of eternity; but I doubt it really will.)

     And is it not the job of the intellect to direct these dramas within our consciousness?

     Can we really dwell in the Garden of Eden forever; denying the fruit of the tree of knowledge?

     In my schema, life is a 70 year journey out of Eden’s unconsciousness, with perhaps a return to the unconscious when I die. But life, the here and now, demands a conscious relationship with my surroundings. And perhaps, I could or should just enjoy the frantasies and not worry too much when reality rears its ugly head and disrupts my dream world; but I doubt it.

     There is something about grim reality that simply won’t be ignored.

     However, when I use my intellect to face up to reality, it really isn’t all that fearful.

     But when my unbridled dreams and fantasies come crashing down; oh, the pain of it all.

     Reply

     • Robert says

       April 20, 2014 at 6:15 pm

       Brian,

       I am beginning to see a resolution of the conflict between infinitely generous, warmhearted love and the need to stop disempowering someone who has become addicted to needing a handout. They are both done out of love for weakened individuals and love of maintaining a balance that is best for the overall population, of which we are all a part and connected to. Modern psychologists have tried to define tough love as the necessary beneficial restraint to pressure the addict to fend for themselves, to pull themselves together, instead of being helpless. But in practice, I seem to believe that much of what is done is to throw the helpless, who does not pull their weight, overboard, for fear of the sluggard sinking the whole ship. And what I have seen in fundamentalist Christianity, of shunning your own kin as rebellious disbelievers in the hope they will have a prodigal son experience, is often absolute cruelty disguised in Christian doublespeak doctrine and pious false justification to disown the headache one has raised. Not always though. Sometimes it works and sometimes it is necessary. Its just not usually done right when some Christians blindly follow a formula they have been taught, without a deeper understanding.

       The other problem about the government giving away too many entitlements to the poor and needy is also a complex issue. Unfortunately it has been totally corrupted by the politics of winning votes. There is well meaning thought and horrendous sin in both parties. The wealthy have more resources and skill, ethical and unethical, to protect their private interests, and only a pretended identification with the struggles of the lower classes. The poor have grass roots, idealistically impassioned crusaders, vying for their votes., and sometimes willing to buy it with government handouts. When the economy takes a plunge, the tiny percentage of the population of the wealthy who have an inordinately large percentage of the wealth and a lot of cleverness, cleverly advance their own interests even if it means sucking the life out of the middle and lower classes. The welfare of a single mother with children and two jobs gets sacrificed to build a third golf course on the other side of town. This is accomplished by trying to win the vote of religious conservatives by politicians who wear crosses but follow Ayn Rand instead of Jesus. The other party has practiced some its own brand of evils, but at least they don’t claim to be the God party. I can credit politics with intensifying my frustration with mainstream religion. For the most part, the God party has been reigning in excess entitlements for the most ungodly reasons, and using the most ungodly methods. That’s my view. So when the issue of charity being unhealthy is addressed, it reminds me of my anger at the God party. They are not the God party. They are the Ayn Rand party.

       The conflict for me with the generous and tough aspects of attempted love, is resolved with Raymond’s introduction of the concept of Bliss Consciousness. That kind of love seems to be on a higher level. I realize that some may think it is just a concept and not real. All I can say is that the right actions of generosity or restraint in various situations seem easier to determine and implement when the source of love is from Bliss consciousness. At least I think so. Seems to be working out fairly well so far.

       Reply

       • Brian says

         April 20, 2014 at 8:15 pm

         Yes, welfare is one of those situations in which danger lurks on both sides of the road. And if we are too dogmatic about avoiding driving off the right hand side of the road, we are likely to end up in the ditch on the left.

         Tao seems to have this helpful notion of Yin and Yang, highlighting complementary opposites and the need for a balanced approach. And in the psychology of perception, there is the concept of Type I and Type II Errors. In one form we see things that are not there, and in the other we miss seeing things that really are there. A predominance of one type of error over the other indicates a bias in our perception.

         One of the strengths of our jury based legal system is that it gives 12 voices the opportunity to discuss contextual issues and to compare the individual perceptions of the given evidence. Hopefully, this debate will somewhat randomise the Type I and II errors of judgement.

         I also think that it is important that we acquire this habit in our personal judgements; using the process of thesis, counterthesis leading ultimately to sysnthesis.

         I guess this is my concern about group dogma. If we only react to the dangers lurking on the right side of the road, it is easy to end up driving straight off the cliff on the left hand side. Is this what the Jewish idea of the Rabi’s commentary on the law is all about? It is a good idea if it is.

         To paraphrase Ernest Hemmingway, “If we are going to hang around in groups that have any sort of a prejudged agenda, it is a good idea to keep a darn good crap detector, close at hand.” Or as Carl Jung said, “All groups have group lies, that they tell each other, over and over.”

         As well as adding our energy to the mission of any group we believe in, we also have an obligation to question its ways and means.

         Reply

         • Robert says

           April 20, 2014 at 9:47 pm

           Brian,

           Well said. You are right about the Rabbis. Another purpose to Rabbinical commentary is that it provided a record of Jewish perspectives from different Jewish schools of thought as these perspectives evolved to keep up with evolving society and growing sophistication in knowledge. It also tried to include elements of the oral law. First there was the Mishna commentary on the Torah, then several Talmudic interpretations of the Mishna were added from different geographical origins as time progressed. Jewish law and wisdom was not written in stone. It evolved and continues to evolve. What is unique about it is that it is strongly aimed at retaining the Jewish ethnic identity after the Diaspora, which it has done successfully and may be in fulfillment of the ancient prophecies regarding the two houses of Israel, but certainly a part of the historic backdrop upon which esoteric wisdom from the Judea-Christian culture has emerged.

           Very informative discussion about errors and how they succeed and fail to balance out.
           I don’t have much to comment regarding this except that my experience on a Jury was somewhat scary, with some making snap gut judgments and others going off into all kinds of tangents based on their own baggage they brought along. Then there was me, the intellectual sitting quietly at the end of the bench, holding out, demanding that the other Juror’s prove to me beyond a doubt the defendant guilt was unquestionable, and hearing arguments like “I know a spade when I see a spade? In the end I think the Jury made the right choice and convicted a criminal deserving life imprisonment , and saw through the ploys of the defense. This went on until we all got sick of the sandwiches that the county provided, and reached a consensus. But it often seemed like the sloppy random balancing of individual bigotry, rather than a smooth convergence of objective, well-rounded individuals.

           Reply

10. Robert says

    April 19, 2014 at 5:17 pm

    Brian,

    I guess you are right about finding reality not so fearful when you face up to it. I tend to avoid situations that I have felt repeatedly defeated in, but when I have stopped ignoring it and moved forward to try again, there is usually a better outcome than I had expected. But here’s the catch; the reason I don’t move forward at first and delay dealing with certain difficult situations is because my intellect is corrupted with panic, anxiety, self-blame, depression, defeatism, and pessimism. But lately I have discovered that my intellect has been flawed the way it has been previously programmed to expect the worst. So my anticipations are an illusion or sorts. The truth is I have a much, much better chance at succeeding than I ever thought possible. I am aware now that I tend toward pessimism and that I need to deal with that, before I can deal successfully with the problematic situation.

    I sense a tendency in you to be overly skeptical, for instance, when you jump to conclusions about animals not having a genuine sense of empathy. It may be true that they look after the interests of their food provider. But they also bond with them. They magic of oxytocin. They are also very sensitive to body language and smell, which helps them genuinely sense when their master is in a major crisis. They have empathetic instincts. I was surprised when I first started to notice this. It’s not all imagined. I’ve observed this in cows, horses, dogs, and cats. Some zoo gorillas have protected children who fall over the rails.

    But, of course, we all have unpleasant experiences learning not to invest in pipedreams, or praying for something to happen that goes just the opposite. If this happens a lot, or in a big way, using your intellect to be more careful next time is the logical way to go. Just that, the intellect needs to see things clearly, not with hyper-skepticism.

    Reply

11. Jay says

    April 19, 2014 at 10:01 pm

    For his seed remained in him. Hmmmmmm. I see it. Do you? Cerebral Spinal Seminal Fluid. Semen. Forbidden fruit. Orgasm. The day you eat there of you shall surely die. Spiritually. Blinded by the flesh. Fornication. Blasphemy, of the Holy Spirit. Ejaculation. The oil for your lamp, Is , the Holy Spirit. Ego wants to rationalize everything, trying to survive. Just the facts. Speak. This is not the time to be meak and weak. Push! Give the tools. Open the doors. Heal the deaf, the dumb, and blind, so that they can hear in their Hearts, to have understanding, and to see wisdom. Your Brothers and Sisters of Spiritual morality are with you. Self Contained. J

    Reply

    • Robert says

      April 20, 2014 at 1:09 pm

      Jay,

      Fascinating poetry.

      Reply

12. anny says

    April 22, 2014 at 11:34 am

    Hello Paul,

    I very much agree with the essence of your article, unconditional love, forgiveness, compassion and no judgment of anyone as the solution to suffering.

    I did look some more into Job. I never really did that before. I always thought that his name had the numerical value of 18, which is the same value as the word ‘chai’, which means life. So I more or less interpreted the story of Job to be the story of life. Without looking it up in the Bible though. This time I did look it up and to my surprise I discovered that his name is not Job (as it is in all other languages that I know) at all but Ijob. It is written as aleph-jod-wav-bet, or 1-10-6-2, which equals 19. These exact same characters however also form the word ‘ojev’, which means enemy. Only the 10 and the 6 change places. This means that these two words are very much related indeed, even more so than when they only share the same numerical value. It is one of the things Job might turn into.

    Then you write about Job being a perfect man. I looked that up in the dictionary and perfect is indeed the first translation of the Hebrew word ‘tam’. ‘Tam’ is written as 400-40, which again points to the possibilities of duality (400 cross/slavery, 40 ego/emotions). So these are still other possible future characteristics of Job. However, ‘tam’ can also be translated as innocent and even simple.

    Job looks like man before the fall. The potential to become an enemy is there, he will develop an ego and encounter emotions, he will even descend into the bitterness of the most extreme suffering but he does not have a clue yet what it all means. Just like Adam and Eve were not aware of the fact that they were naked before they entered the world of duality.

    Next there is the story of God and Satan. I think that is more or less the same story as the creation of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, with the serpent, the ‘nachasj’ in it. It is mostly interpreted as if God just lets the devil have his way with a perfect person but Satan is not really a devil. His name is written as 300-9-50, which in my way of interpreting means the divine process of involution and evolution (300), which gives birth (9) to higher awareness (50). This process needs some help to get going, ergo enter the ‘nachasj’/Satan. The word ‘satan’ in Hebrew means opponent and you might also see it as a force that pushes against you in order for you to train your strength. Some sort of gym as it were. Just as God created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil for us to discover in the end that all fruits are good, not just the pleasant ones (even the ‘tamar’, which is ‘400-mar’ and the bitterness of the cross – which is where the suffering comes in – and turns out to be a sweet date if only you eat/digest it). And when you have eaten all these fruits and digested them, you will discover that you have eaten from the tree of life after all, because in the end they prove to be one and the same tree, as was shown in some articles already, both from Joshua and myself. I think the story of Job is this same process from beginning to end.

    Reply

    • Paul says

      April 24, 2014 at 7:18 am

      You know, it’s absolutely amazing how we can take different routes to get to the same goal. I come to the same conclusions you do concerning Job. I am going to quote you below in bold/italics, and then follow your quotes with things I have have found/discerned long, long ago (in italics, using bold within those italics only for emphasis).

      “Job looks like man before the fall. The potential to become an enemy is there, he will develop an ego and encounter emotions, he will even descend into the bitterness of the most extreme suffering but he does not have a clue yet what it all means. Just like Adam and Eve were not aware of the fact that they were naked before they entered the world of duality.”

      And here is a correlating scripture that I believe confirms your conclusion:

      “Thou [wast] perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee” (Eze 28:15).

      Amazing, or what??? We can see his ego and emotions in his response to his three rich neighbours, who do a really bad job of counseling him. Then Elihu (could he be the same as the Apostle Paul — the higher consciousness within us), who addresses the fallen Job’s condition when he says to him:

      “What man [is] like Job, [who] drinketh up scorning like water? Which goeth in company with the workers of iniquity, and walketh with wicked men” (Job 34:7-8).

      Perfect Job is no longer perfect because iniquity was found in him. His suffering has brought it to light.

      I believe that Job’s wife saying to him, “curse God and die,” is Eve giving Adam/Jesus the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Look at this scripture:

      “And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed [is] the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat [of] it all the days of thy life” (Gen. 3:17).

      But Job replies to her, “you speak as a fool.” This is Adam/Jesus in the Garden of Eden/Gethsemane (which I believe to be one and the same) encountering Satan/Peter, who tells him “you shall not surely die” (Gen. 3:4, Matt. 16:21-22).

      And then you write this:

      “Next there is the story of God and Satan. I think that is more or less the same story as the creation of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, with the serpent, the ‘nachasj’ in it. It is mostly interpreted as if God just lets the devil have his way with a perfect person but Satan is not really a devil. His name is written as 300-9-50, which in my way of interpreting means the divine process of involution and evolution (300), which gives birth (9) to higher awareness (50). This process needs some help to get going, ergo enter the ‘nachasj’/Satan. The word ‘satan’ in Hebrew means opponent and you might also see it as a force that pushes against you in order for you to train your strength”

      The scriptures I quote above captures this paragraph beautifully, do they not? Indeed, it seems clear to me that the rain (adversity) that is the blessings that pour forth from the opening of the windows of heaven (Gen. 7:11; Mal. 3:10) are a cleansing and transforming mechanism that “gives birth to higher awareness” (your words), for at the end of his trials he could say: “I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now mine eye seeth thee” (Job 42:5). This is the purpose for ALL of our fires/floods/adversities/hell. We have to go through them in order to understand that there really is nothing to them.

      I find your post to be amazing, and it gives me many insights. Thanks so much for that.

      Reply

      • anny says

        April 24, 2014 at 8:43 am

        Hi Paul,

        Thanks for your reaction to my comment. Yes, it is absolutely amazing how the same themes return again and again in different guises. I think that is to enable us slowly to recognize the patterns. Actually on rethinking the story of Job, I think it tells the story of the development through the whole cycle already more in detail than the story of Adam and Eve. I only wrote about the beginning as it were, where Job was still ‘innocent and simple’ but in what follows I think the whole journey has been described. I do not feel the need to examine and explain all the details. More and more it is becoming clear that I am looking for patterns only.

        My main point was to point out that God is not meant to be interpreted as some unfeeling tyrant or Satan as a devil. The same is of course true in the story of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In both stories it involves suffering but suffering is meant to be an experience that gives us conscious awareness of the meaning of bliss (among other things). The same is hidden in the word sorrow that you quoted from Gen. 3:17. Sorrow is ‘itsavon’, which means ‘ets-2’, tree of duality (which is just another term for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) but the word ends with the noen, which is the number 50 and means higher awareness.

        It is all about the experience of contrast and the willingness of learning to see the good in the difficulties you are facing and to grow in awareness through it. All these ‘negative’ words with the hidden positive meanings confirm that for me.

        Reply

13. Robert says

    April 23, 2014 at 3:40 pm

    Anny,

    I have used this article from the Jewish Virtual Library to try to understand Jewish versions of Gematria:

    http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0007_0_07165.html

    I am guessing that many of the other explanations of Gematria on the web are based on this same article because they contain phrases and sentences that seem to be lifted directly out of it. This article also contains a lot of details and Judaic terminology that were probably omitted for brevity in other articles.

    This article seems to emphasize that Gematria was generally used as a mnemonic device to highlight a concept that already existed in the oral or written laws. It was hardly ever used to derive a new concept. It was applied to exoteric literature (bible and Talmud) and esoteric books (Kabbalah). The bible does not forbid the use of Gematria. Only one Rabbi , Nahmanides, tried to outlaw its use and this went over like prohibition of alcohol in early 20th century America. All other rabbinical authorities, including Kabbalists, have simply cautioned against overdoing it or using it unwisely.

    From what I can tell, your application of Gematria generally follows the description above. It is used to draw attention to concepts or theories that are generally already known. This is in contrast to the idea that numerical calculations were used to mystically divine new truths. Although at times, when you calculate different numerical values and compare it to others, that it is a way of suggesting alternative meanings that already exist, but that you might not have otherwise thought of.

    I am thinking that there may also be the element of subjective interpretation that is guided by the Holy Spirit, gnosis, or intuition, that leads to favoring one interpretation from another. Maybe there are rare instances where a mystic interpretation revealed by Gematria is intentionally encoded by the author (or the spirit working unseen through the auth0r) into the Hebrew words and phrases. But I think this is very rare. Gematria is more of a learning device to emphasize alternate exoteric or esoteric meanings that are already established as fact or speculation.

    The understanding I explained above helps me answer the question of why there are so many methods of calculations in Gematria. They are all not that sophisticated (for instance, sophisticated like solving a quadratic equation or using advanced calculus). They use simple addition, multiplication, sums, accumulated sums, and simple reduction to a single digit, etc. Almost anyone can do the calculations with a little practice, along with studying the symbolic interpretations of each number. Each calculation method gives a different interpretation. So when comparing a given set of words or phrases, there are a tremendous number of possibilities that can be found using different methods or combination of methods, until one or two that suggest meaningful verbal interpretations are found and selected out from the others that are not meaningful. Superimposed on this may be the hidden (or maybe mystical) interaction of the interpreter’s subconscious and connection to higher consciousness, guiding the selection of calculation methods used and picking out the meaningful results from the variety of un-meaningful results, kind of like in using Tarot cards.

    It also helps me understand that if Gematria is not used wisely, it can lead to dangerous, wild, or rigid interpretations which feed fantasies, ego, and mental fixations, when not checked by comparing its conclusions to all the other sources of wisdom and knowledge. That is the risk of esoteric interpretation in general… it provides a lot of rope to hang yourself or someone else if not applied wisely. I think that is why some rabbis describe Gematria as “a side dish” or “dessert” that is supplementary to the main meal. The main meal is a foundation or grounding. And of couse, sometimes the foundation is limited or flawed.

    Comments?

    Reply

    • anny says

      April 24, 2014 at 5:50 am

      Hello Robert,

      First of all, thanks for your reaction to my comment a few days ago. I wanted to give a quick reply but there was no reply button anymore so I left it for the moment. Indeed I have become a grandmother again (for the fourth time) to a healthy grandchild but because of his mother’s health condition we have been taking care of the baby most of the time. So I am only back on the blog sporadically.

      It is an interesting topic you bring up. Although I have read a lot of books over the last four or five decades, and some of them address the subject of gematria, my own knowledge of it is purely derived from the books by prof. Friedrich Weinreb and it has been a long time since I read those. I think I have already explained that what I write is mostly intuitive knowledge and partly based on what I read in those books and material from other sources as well, for instance on this blog. When I wite I am in a meditative state and my only beacon really is unconditional love. If anything that comes up does not steer into that direction, I discard it immediately. I also feel energetically if what comes up has a high frequency or not.

      I am fully aware that this does not come up to scientific standards where everything needs to be checked and double checked and preferably be substantiated by the findings of someone else. That is not the way I work or would be able to work. I do not claim to bring the truth. I only share what is my truth at this moment. As I am evolving my truth is evolving too. New elements may be added and changes made. I think that may even have become visible in my articles. It is a work in progress and nothing is fixed.

      What you write in your comment is about the scholarly approach, which is totally different. I do not venture into that field at all; it would require a lot of study to do so and it would be knowledge of the mind for me, whereas I work from the heart and indeed under divine guidance as I experience it. And again, it is by no means my intention to influence anybody at all to change his or her way of thinking. Each should go his own path and search for his own truth. If what I contribute can be of assistance, then I am glad. If not, then just leave it.

      The conclusion to what you wrote is: “It also helps me understand that if Gematria is not used wisely, it can lead to dangerous, wild, or rigid interpretations which feed fantasies, ego, and mental fixations, when not checked by comparing its conclusions to all the other sources of wisdom and knowledge.”

      I agree that that is true but that is true of almost anything. You should never limit yourself to one source only. That is why already long before I left the church I also started studying different religions and philosophies in a general kind of way and it was a joy to find the same principal truths like the importance of love, unity, harmony etc. in all of them. Later I also found confirmation of some of my discoveries in the esoteric interpretation of the Bible there, or the other way around. And keeping focussed on unconditional love and staying in the heart will do a lot to prevent me from becoming trapped in the ego or wild fantasies.

      Do not misunderstand me. It is very interesting what you write but you are a scientist/scholar and I am so obviously not. I have been blessed with a very bad memory for details so I was forced to go straight to the essence of things. Only later I discovered that this was in fact a blessing because it enabled me to discover patterns because I was not distracted by details.

      By the way, during the time I was not active on the blog, I did read articles sometimes and I certainly appreciated yours, as well as your comments to the other ones.

      Reply

      • Robert says

        April 24, 2014 at 7:55 am

        Anny,

        Thanks for your thoughtful comment. It reminds me of the importance of meditating and being love oriented. Science is my skill, but getting in touch with my intuition is my salvation. Glad you mentioned Friedrich Weinreb. I hadn’t heard about him before and now I discovered he wrote a classic book in German, the English translation of which is entitled “The Roots of the Bible”. From the reviews I have read of this book, I would want to buy it immediately, but it is out of print, there is no ebook, and no one is selling their used copies. One review of the book summarized the major topics in Genesis that he applied gematria to, and these are exactly the same ones that Pedro has attempted to explain, including the tetragrammaton, which I have struggled to understand. If I can get a hold of the English translation, I am certain it will make a lot more sense. I might have some luck in the libraries.

        Reply

        • anny says

          April 24, 2014 at 9:46 am

          Hello Robert,

          I did not even know that there actually existed an English translation of Friedrich Weinreb’s book. You may or may not recall that somebody else already asked for my help in locating an English version last year but neither of us even succeeded in establishing if an English translation even existed. So the English title of the book is The Roots of the Bible. However, the book is only about the Torah basically.

          As far as I recall, prof. Weinreb wrote that God has a different Name in each of the four worlds (I do not remember in which book though) and he does give an explanation of the Tetragrammaton (which is related to the fourth world we live in) in the book you want to buy. I do not think that is the only possible explanation though. I have seen other ones elsewhere that are just as valid and even ventured some of my own in some of my articles. I more or less see it as the principle (force, energy) that governs life in this world, which is after all the world of the ‘tardema’, the dream world or illusion. As such explanations come up by playing with associations, but I do not believe there is any one absolute interpretation.

          As far as Pedro’s explanations are concerned, I found them difficult to follow as well. I do not really feel the need to understand them either because they did not resonate with me. This does not mean that these explanations are not right but I just keep to the things that do resonate with me and that keeps me busy enough.

          If you find it that difficult to follow him, it probably means that you do not resonate with those explanations either. So why not find your own meaning among explanations that do resonate with you from the beginning?

          I hope that you will be able to find a copy of prof. Weinreb’s book somewhere and if you do I would love to hear your opinion about it. I was totally fascinated by it in the beginning and then, years later, after I had begun my own search and just checked something sometimes, I discovered that I interpreted some things totally differently by then but not necessarily in contradiction to it. There are so many hidden layers and ways of looking at words. I am not aftaid of differences in interpretation anymore nor do I feel the need to fixate on one absolute meaning of a text.

          Reply

          • Brian says

            April 24, 2014 at 3:37 pm

            Well said, Anny. None of this stuff is worthy of our dying in the trenches.

            In my dotage, I have decided to enrol in one of these MOOCs, where you can study a subject at university level in your own home; all for free. Who can say the world is not getting better?

            The subject I chose was advanced mathematics, which I last studied some 50 years ago, mainly because I had to. My oh my, how much the educational experience has changed for today’s students.

            50 years ago, electronic calculators were in their absolute infancy and way too expensive for the university to purchase; let alone a poverty stricken student. So, we used a mechanical calculating machine. You typed in your number and turned the handle a number of times and voila, there was the answer to your multiplication. For division, you turned the handle backwards.

            Someone once said that once you look through a microscope, the world will never seem the same again. How much more is this so for a digital computer, with its hyperlinking, drill-down, multidimensional matrices and rapid access to stored information.

            Thinking about how much these new tools alter our way of comprehending the world, I think this reinforces your idea that it is almost inevitable that we will each interpret these sacred metaphors in our own unique way, partly at least in accordance with our life experiences.

            The computer has certainly changed my view of mathematics. For a start, it has allowed me to understand a lot of the subject matter for the first time, thanks to the rapid 3D output of a computer screen; compared with the 2D printed page of my trusty old text book, 50 years ago.

            This has allowed my mind to contemplate a much more complex universe. For instance, consider yourself sitting for the next 12 hours looking at a map of your surroundings. Thanks to the polar coordinates (north, south, etc) you know exactly where you are, right? Now imagine an observer sitting somewhere out in space, observing you looking at your map. In 12 hours time, things will not have changed for you, but for the observer, your east and west will now be opposite; because you are now on the opposite side of the spherical Earth. What has changed? And how exactly did the situation change, during the intervening 12 hours?

            It seems modern maths is giving us the power to analyse beyond the traditional 3 dimensions of space (plus time). Many of the paradoxes that our ancestors could not comprehend are suddenly bursting into view.

            It seems maths also has its metaphorical explanations. These archetypes are the various methods, like long division, that most of us managed to sort of comprehend in a high school maths course. Our use of these basic methods depends mainly on rote memory of a sequence of steps. Little was required in the way of understanding the underlying principles upon which these methods are based. However, the study of higher maths seems to involve a disciplined examination the principles underlying these basic archetypal methods.

            And it is a very disciplined world of precise definitions and rigorously logical proofs that one is drawing reliable conclusions. The result seems to be a well designed edifice that by way of the laws of logic supports itself, with no call on any mystical or arkane authority. Complex it is; but nothing incomprehensible is allowed in the construction of this schema.

            The result is a more reliable journey from metaphorical insight to meaningful comprehension and reliable utility. And I would commend the rigor of its definitions and logic to the subjects we discuss together at this website.

            And I agree with you, Anny, that even with all this added rigor, our journey appears inevitably to be towards our individual ideosyncratic views of the world; and importantly, how we can coexist with others who will inevitably have a subtly different views of reality from our own.

            The precision and rigor of mathematics may well enhance the effectiveness of our politics; and even our religions. And I am optimistic that the evolution of the computer, with its high speed calculus, will enhance our human ability to adopt the ways and means of mathematics.

            Perhaps as a generation, that may be one of our gifts to the future.

            Evolution goes on.

            Reply

          • Robert says

            April 24, 2014 at 3:57 pm

            Brian,

            Man is but an a beautiful tiny green living inchworm crawling slowly across the black keys of a laptop computer, sliding down off the K and then climbing up the J, trying to comprehend the universe.

            Reply

          • Robert says

            April 24, 2014 at 5:27 pm

            Anny,

            Looks like Amazon recently ran out of this book. The only place I can order the English version from is http://weinreb-tonarchiv.de/Roots-of-the-Bible which is Germany. The price is 27,10 EUR which I think is about $35 US. The website is in German and I don’t know enough of German to figure it out. Maybe you can give it a try. Maybe your friend can get it here.

            Otherwise it is available from libraries listed in http://www.worldcat.org/title/roots-of-the-bible-an-ancient-view-for-a-new-outlook/oclc/16093180?loc=

            Reply

14. anny says

    April 25, 2014 at 10:17 am

    Hello Brian,

    Thanks for your comment. I am glad you are seeing things my way in this respect. I am getting more and more convinced that it is important to be less obsessed by being right and to allow each person to follow his or her own path without judgment, and consequently to feel free to follow our own path ourselves. We are all different after all. We can learn a lot from each other but only on a voluntary basis.

    So you are in your dotage? You could have fooled me! Well, I am afraid I am too but I do not let it worry me. It is great that you have taken up a study again and I can imagine how different it must be since you studied it 50 years ago. I already experienced that with my eldest and youngest sons, who in age are ten years apart, and who both studied electrical engineering. When our youngest was doing this study it was hardly recongnizable as the same study, so much had changed. And indeed most of that was because computers were hardly used when my eldest was a student. He even took some of the same courses during the evening (to catch up) that his brother was doing during the day. And that was only a time difference of ten years.

    Personally I recognize that mechanical calculating machine you mention. I used it too in the office! I really feel like a dinosaur because during my working life I never even used a computer. It is that long ago.

    I must admit that I cannot quite follow you when you start writing about mathematics but I do remember the eye opener you gave me by letting me grasp the importance of the fact that the Hebrew characters are both numbers and letters. So I kind of guess what you might mean by the metaphorical explanations of maths, though I could not possibly find any words for it.

    Reply

15. Robert says

    April 28, 2014 at 11:10 pm

    Pedro,

    I came across a spiritual system that took an attitude toward compassion similar to yours. A discussion of compassion appears in chapter 32 of the free online book: http://www.butterfliesfree.com/ButterfliesAreFreeToFly.html

    The spiritual system seems very foreign to Christianity, and I think my programming as a Christian would not let me accept this system as it is. But the author does describe some of the negative aspects of the experience we usually identity as compassion and his explanations have some merit. On the surface, it goes against what the SOS website advocates – meditation, transcending ego, connectedness to others. So this probably explains why people on SOS, including myself, would react to anyone challenging the usefulness of traditional compassion. But if we go deeper, the author is really saying that we need to get to point of surrender where we let go of all programming and conditioning before we can be free enough to choose helping others for the joy of it, which is more genuine and natural, rather than out of guilt and compulsion to be a savior; and that if people would follow that example of letting go, it would in the long term relieve the problem of suffering at the root cause.

    I don’t totally agree with that, because there is nothing more natural and genuine than a mother putting herself at risk, or sacrificing herself, for her children when they are helpless and in danger. It’s biological, a survival instinct evolved to preserve a species, as is being naturally protective of others close to you. But the author’s explanation has some merit, although it would take a lot of effort with people programmed in the Christian traditions to accept that.

    But the author’s two phase transition from the cocoon of limitations to, after surrender to s higher power, the butterfly of freedom, parallels Job’s transition.

    Reply

16. Justin says

    May 14, 2014 at 10:54 am

    This Article has been stuck in my head for some time now, and it seems that every time I try and let it go something brings it back into my mind. Because of this I have been thinking of suffering for just over a month. At one point in time that would have driven me crazy, but this time it was different; and for once I have an answer to suffering that I can live with.

    Let me start by saying that I believe that Paul was correct in saying that Hatred is the root of all suffering. However, I do not feel that a deep enough look was taken at Hatred, or at suffering given to children (who have no choice in the matter, and I refuse to believe that the hatred of one life is carried over to the next; it is all burned away in the emotional/astral “after life”)

    So let’s dive in:
    Why do we suffer?
    The surface answer is that we suffer because of Hatred held in our hearts. By removing hatred we remove suffering. This is great for an adult, but why do children suffer when they have not learned to hate yet?
    To answer this question we must look at Hatred itself. It’s a difficult thing to do because we all know that hatred flies in the face of love. And as Pedro has pointed out quite adamantly, ignoring the hatred (suffering) can cause it to decrease, within us. However, this does not advance us towards our goal of letting our light shine, instead it causes us to build walls around the uncomfortable. I will expand on the love that lies within inactivity in a moment.
    Hatred is ignorance, not ignorance in the sense that I don’t know the answer to a question, but ignorance to the power and depth of Love. Now that we have hatred defined lets relook at suffering.
    Suffering is caused by Hatred becomes, suffering is caused by ignorance. This changes everything, for now suffering is not something to be ignored but something to be embraced. For the suffering reveals our ignorance of Love. If we truly wish to become knowledgeable of Love then we must face our suffering and learn what it is that we are ignorant about. There for, suffering is from God! It is not a punishment, but a path to love; a path that is straight and that leads to a narrow gate.
    To see this in action let’s look at some common suffering that is experienced:
    1) A family is too poor to afford even the most basic of enmities. What better chance is there to reject the materialism of the world? To become unbound by the most basic needs of humanity. Does this mean we should not help those suffering from the lack of basic needs of life? NO! Help them if your heart leads you to that, but do not pity them for they have been given the chance to learn a truth about love.
    Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? 26 Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? 27 Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life[a]?
    28 “And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin.29 Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. 30 If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? 31 So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. 33 But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. 34 Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own. — Matthew 6:25-34

    2) A person has a Job they dislike, and due to the economy they cannot find another. Having lived this one personally I can attest to how soul draining it can be. What better way to learn, that it is not what you do but how you do it? Work your hardest and do what you know to be right. If your employer is taking advantage of others, do not be afraid to face that challenge. But if it is simply a matter of doing something you do not enjoy then turn to love and realize that you are blessed to be in the position you are in.
    22 Bondservants, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not by way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but with sincerity of heart, fearing the Lord. 23 Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, 24 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ. 25 For the wrongdoer will be paid back for the wrong he has done, and there is no partiality. – Colossians 3:22-25

    The lessons of love are not always straight forward though, and one thing I have learned over this month of contemplation is that the rules are bound by the instance they are being applied against. An example of this is where Pedro says to ignore the suffering of others. There are times, when the loving thing to do is to allow a person to suffer. This is needed because the lesson that suffering has to teach cannot be learned when the person is saved from the suffering.
    Let’s look at an example:
    1) My sister in law recently went through a horrible break up with her “wife”, I use quotes because it was not a legal marriage and in this case thank God it wasn’t. She was left with a baby, with nowhere to turn but to her father, who she refused to live with, or her sister, and myself and baby. Now, we were more than willing to let her into our home and help her in any way possible. We even let her stay rent free so that she could build up a steady foundation to step out on her own. But does she do that? No, after 4 months and a tax return she had no more than when she moved in. What we had done, in acting in a manner we believed to love, was to reduce her suffering at the expense of her learning. She now has to pay us rent, an amount that would be equal to what she would pay on her own. This has forced her to feel the suffering that we was supposed to feel, the suffering of having to stand on your own and the learning to not be dependent on man but instead to trust in God (love) and to learn to handle her finances so that she can live life on her terms and not another’s. This same lesson can be applied to others in her situation. Are you starving because you cannot work or because you have some vice that hold you back? If so then is it not more loving to help the person conquer the vice and find work than to give them a handout.

    To sum it all up, suffering is caused by Hatred, but hatred is merely ignorance of love. There for, suffering is a tool, used by love, to teach those who “have eyes to see, and ears to hear” about the various aspects of love. And the fastest way to end your suffering, is to learn the lesson being taught.

    Reply

17. Sparks says

    May 14, 2014 at 11:58 am

    Dear Justin,
    This is a beautifully written follow-up post! Thank you so much…

    I agree with all that you have written here, suffering is an extremely difficult and mysterious subject to even begin to break-down and dissect.
    But here Paul has directed our minds and hearts to the one not so nice part of us humans, and we all struggle to accept that we cannot be a part of it, when in fact each of us plays a part in the hard-learned lesson of unconditional love (which I believe it is a part of, just as much as compassion and understanding).
    Those who do not give home in their hearts to the “Fruits of the Spirit”, will never really know love at all. Are not the Fruits of the Spirit our other family?

    Again, Justin, this is a Blessed post, your relentless thoughts on it have revealed to myself that the Spirit is moving within you to bring this intensely felt message forward.

    Blessings and Love to your sister-in-law, as she navigates a very difficult time, and all of your family as well.
    With Love, Sparks

    Reply

18. kayode says

    August 25, 2015 at 2:39 am

    it is amazing how God has created everything on this planet, when I see the undeniable knowledge of pedro , I can’t help but be amazed that he himself as not yet attained with such dynamic knowledge. if I have half of Pedro’s knowledge, am done. Yet Paul’s article are just as flawless, pure and perfect, making wise the simple. please I have sent messages to Paul’s e-mail pls do me a favour and reply me. I love every comment on this article and reading the comments alone is instructive on its own

    Reply

    • Joshua Tilghman says

      December 25, 2015 at 3:27 pm

      Kayode,

      I will let Paul know.

      Reply

    • Paul says

      December 30, 2015 at 7:19 am

      Hi Kayode.

      Thanks so much for your comment. A few months ago you sent me a couple of emails. I responded to both of them and I never heard back from you. I concluded that you probably never received the replies, which sometimes happens with international transmissions. (I believe you’re in Africa, right?) In any event, I am thrilled that you found this site. Although I have not written a post for it in quite some time, Joshua and I are very close and he will make sure I get whatever messages you send through this medium.

      I also agree with you that Pedro is one of the brightest people I have ever met. I’m sure you haven’t seen or heard the last of him.

      Blessings!

      Reply