Brotherhood?

The more I think about it the more I’m convinced that the secrets of life, of the Universe, of Immortality, all lie within the context of “the many and the few”. That only the few who can sublimate their ego sufficiently to dismiss their mundane achievements and the resulting possessions, are among those who can see, who can perceive, the truth.

No one could ever accuse any of the leaders of the established religions to be capable of such a strange way of thinking. Only recently the newly elected pope, Francis I, said that we are all protectors of one another. That “I am my brother’s keeper”. That is fine if you define just who is my brother. Since we are using a biblical expression, are those whom Yeshûa call “dead”, are they my brothers, too?  Am I their keeper, also? Pope Francis seems to think so. But if so, to what degree? To what extent?

It seems to me that we are continuously confusing the meaning of our kinship. Perhaps it is not the embodiments, the external expressions, of the souls that we are to take care of, but the inner entity, the essence, the real thing. Perhaps we are brothers “in spirit” only, not in physical, transient, overfed, egotistical, over puffed forms?

Perhaps?

I am convinced that Yeshûa never had our bodies in mind. I know he fed them fish and bread on one occasion, but wasn’t this only to sustain the bodies of men/women, so that he could share the truth with them? After all, the rest of the time he didn’t feed the masses, nor did he go into restaurant business, though he continued to feed their souls.

Brothers in spirit?

Peter was feeding the souls. Paul tried to feed the… brotherhood. They both believed in their cause. They were both necessary. Still are. If you want to know how and why, read Peter and Paul. It’d take more than a blog to explain.

The problem is that while some of us are hardly awake, hardly aware of our infinite potential, this potential continues to exist within every single one of us. No matter how badly we manifest it at any given time. Who can tell if someone who will survive a day longer thanks to us feeding them fish and bread, will not have his or her eyes opened by our act of generosity itself?

Who can tell?

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on Amazon for Peter and Paul.  

Your thoughts are important to me. 

For a free download contact mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Is Evolution Dead?

The Seal of the United States states: E pluribus unum, meaning “out of many, one”. This statement refers to the vast collection of expatriates of divergent physical characteristics, who combine to create the most powerful nation of the world.

A noble endeavour.

Does the same apply to evolution? If man is the peak, the acme, of the evolutionary trend then shall we, Homo sapiens, eventually eliminate all competition (we’re well on the way) to rule supreme on this ball of dust to the exclusion of all other biological life-forms? Or shall we incorporate them into our own physio/psyche to create Homo omnibus to rule, supreme, over no one at all?

There is another way of looking at this subject.

If nature/evolution/divine-intervention brought us from a single-celled amoeba to the trillions-celled human, will the nature/evolution/divine-intervention cease its activities, satisfied that status quo cannot be improved upon? Or… considering the billions of years behind us, will the same triad continue in its activities for another few billion years, to advance Homo sapiens as much again as we are today from an amoeba?

Just consider.

Four arms would enable us to text two messages at the same time. A fifth arm would enable us to munch simultaneously on potato chips while washing them down with beer. We might also develop a second nose through which we could smoke cigarettes, or other weed, without having to stop eating. Nature/evolution, with or without divine-intervention, has achieved much, much more since our single-celled existence. Another arm for continuous cell-phone communication wouldn’t hurt, either.

Having studied human form/behaviour during my last holidays, it seems that we, as a species, are well on the way to developing physique consisting of enormous stomachs, atrophying leg and buttock muscles (unnecessary for munching and texting, while sufficient to get to one’s automobile), and vacant facial expression attesting to the equally atrophying brain whose functions have been, in large measure, already taken over by electronic devices.

Perhaps our scientists might take steps to stop nature/evolution in its tracks, to spare us from further improvements. There might be a greater problem with divine-intervention, which, according to most ancient eastern philosophies, has already given up on us some eons ago, and is ready to recycle us, once again, to start anew, perhaps with a two-celled amoeba, in the hope of better results.

The one cheerful thought is that, as we are “e pluribus unum”, we shall be recycled in great togetherness in a great pre-human cauldron of pre-evolutionary stew, which will probably start with a great Golden Age, followed by Eve handing us an apple, which will, over billions of years, lead us to yet another demise.

Good luck.

Alternatively, we might consider that we are all disembodies entities, playing with our bodies as toys, for purely hedonistic reasons. In that case, the above scenario could bring us nothing but pure joy and, possibly, extremely large stomachs. Yet another alternative is proposed in Winston’s Kingdom, Book Three of my Winston Trilogy.

Your choice. 

  

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on Amazon for Winston’s Kingdom.  

Your thoughts are important to me.

For a free download contact mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

The Trinity, Part III

The Subconscious is, perhaps, is the most fascinating facet of reality. In as much as the Unconscious forever retains its potential form (religions call it spirit, which is meaningless until explained), and the Conscious is an ephemeral and very transient condition, the Subconscious is the sum total of all that has been manifested, or brought out from its potential form, since the beginning of time. The Unconscious is omnipresent. Those of us who can sublimate our sense of separation, our ego, are well aware of it.

It would be wise to remember that time only exists within the transient confines of Conscious awareness. While the Subconscious is little more than—to use a modern expression—a memory storage, when we vacate the instrument of the Unconscious (i.e. vacate our physical bodies), the Subconscious with its indescribable storage of all that we manifested/experienced/created over billions of years, becomes our conscious awareness. We can enjoy our Subconscious repeatedly, timelessly, eternally. In this incorporeal form we, and all that we have already accomplished, are indestructible, even as we are in our dreams. If we learn lucid dreaming, we can experience the heaven we are building for ourselves, today. In this state, however, we cannot bring out any more Potential into our reality—the reason being that there are no consequences to our actions/behaviour within the Subconscious.

Many will call this condition heaven.

It is a static form of existence, although within this state we are free to roam the universes at will, enjoying all that we have brought out from its Potential. We lack nothing, because we are not aware that we lack anything. Nevertheless, after a little while, a thousand years or so, we begin to feel an itch, which we cannot really define. Over another period, we begin to wonder if there could be something else that we have not as yet experienced.

This is the moment of Eureka!

We begin to search for a means of bring out something that we feel still exists in our Unconscious. Also, some of us might not enjoy the reality we’ve created. After all, we alone are the creators of our Subconscious. For some of us it may feel more like hell…

Ye are gods?

We search our memory banks—and then we have it.

We are born, again, to experience the mode of becoming as conscious beings. In this form our memory banks are very limited, which enables us to search for the not as yet experienced. We delve into our Unconscious.

There are many hardships, as our intention is to bring out into the open that which was never as yet manifested. It’s a risky proposition, but some of us think it’s worth it.

What do you think?

Perhaps, one day, in the fullness of time, some of us will create a heaven we no longer desire to leave. But even then there will be Bhodavistas amongst us, who will take pity on the rest of us. We shall see.

Other versions of Heaven are discussed in, Beyond Religion II. You might prefer them…

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on Amazon for BRII.  

Your thoughts are important to me. 

For a free download contact mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

The Trinity, Part II

The instrument the Unconscious uses to manifest itself in tangible form is called the Conscious. Our, yours and mine, consciousness is the means which brings the invisible, the impalpable, the potential, into physical reality. We are the extensions of the Unconscious enabling it to regard itself. To become aware of Itself. To become aware of a fraction of Its Infinite Potential.

The reason for this individualization is that infinity cannot be embraced with a conscious mind. It lies within the realm of the Unconscious, forever to remain there. It lies beyond the concept of time and space, beyond anything that is tangible. It can only be understood in minute fractions, which add up to a greater whole.

This applies to everything that, one day, will be brought out to manifest itself in a material and/or immaterial forms.

There is only One Reality, and that is whatever we are aware of. That which we do not perceive is not real—at least not to us—thus any discussion about such would be futile. And, surely, there should always be a consequence—a cause and an effect. That is what reality is based on. Remove either and whatever we define as reality no longer makes any sense.

And, as mentioned, the consequence of the above is the Trinity. The three clearly defined states of the Unconscious, the Subconscious, and the Conscious, satisfy this condition. For thousands of years various groups tried hard to make religions out of this concept, and, invariably, they painted themselves into a dead end by externalizing the observer and the observed.

It is vital to understand that the Unconscious is Infinite in respects. It is not limited in any way. Whatever we are capable of bringing out into our reality, it is you and I who shape it into a physical or mental form—who give transient reality to the absolute neutrality of the Unconscious.

We, and we alone, make the manifestation “good or bad”, depending on our point of view. We must remember that only losers of wars are deemed guilty of crimes against humanity—never the winners. We, our conscious mind, create the reality we consider ‘real’. Morality is a human invention, which serves to control people’s behaviour. Ethics, on the other hand, is intended to be based on truth.

The one consolation is that physical consequences of our choices are always transient. Not so, however, with the ‘non-physical’ consequences. Those are described in my next blog.

Below my journey of discovery, inspired by Apocryphal Acts of John: “A lamp am I to you that perceive me. A mirror am I to you that know me.”

I walked a distant shore

Looking left, right, behind me.

I climbed the highest mountain,

I crossed the widest sea.

I looked in every place,

as far as eye could see…

Yet ‘til my heart gives out

I’ll keep looking for Thee.

I don’t know who you are,

I’ve never seen your face.

I’d only seen your shadow

though it was filled with light—

and I was blinded by you

whoever you might be.

And then I saw a mirror

and realized: You are me.

PS. Other delusions are discussed in DELUSIONS—Pragmatic Realism. You might care to write a brief review on Amazon. Your thoughts are important to me. For a free download contact mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

The Trinity, Part I

-->
Throughout history people have been obsessed with the concept of Trinity. There always seemed to have been searching for a cause and effect, which would justify and explain the reality they perceived with their senses. For the next three blogs I’ll try to explain my version of this search. You may or may not agree, but it may help you to find your own vision of reality.

I must also stress that it is not my intention, nor desire, to compete with any religion. The learned doctors and theologians, invariably externalize their ‘divinity’, their ultimate potential, into realms which can be neither witnessed nor proven. As such, they have no practical meaning for me. My proposal is practical, useful, and can be practiced and witnessed by every man, woman and child. And, I repeat, it is not competing with your religious convictions.

The single reality consists of three forms, three distinct facets of the same concept, which is the concept of awareness. My premise is that if you are not aware of anyone thing, then, as far as you are concerned, it does not exist. You must experience that which you perceive for it to be real. You must have experience of it to make it your own. And you can most certainly experience my Trinity. Over the ages, people devised different names for the Triumvirate, perhaps for the lack of modern terminology. Be it as it may, here’s my proposal.

The single Reality, manifests as the Unconscious, the Conscious, and the Subconscious. We are all familiar with those terms, and here I wish to discuss them in detail.

The Unconscious is the essence, the eternal potential, outside concepts of time or space. As logical entities, we accept that nothing can happen out of nothing. There must be a cause for it to result in an effect. For that to happen we must assume that everything already exists; only we are, as yet, unable to perceive it. This impalpable existence of all that is, was or could be, is the Unconscious, within which everything already exists in its Potential Form.

This potential includes things, utilitarian objects, all the way to planetary systems, galaxies and multiple universes—objects of transient existence—as well as all biological and zoological forms.

The immaterial potential manifests in ideas, thoughts, and emotions resulting in compositions, poems, literary forms and other works of art that are not admired as things but as that which they represent or symbolize.

Next blog will discuss how these potential forms are brought out into the reality we call our world. Transient existence though it may be, it is the necessary component of the One Reality in which we have our being.

What others regard as Trinity is discussed in my essay #51, Beyond Religion III. Again, what do you think?

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on Amazon for BR III.  

Your thoughts are important to me. 

For a free download contact mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

The Sperm and the Egg

I like eggs for breakfast, but they must be bigger than the dot at the end of this sentence. As for sperm, well, they’re just too small to bother. And yet, the scientist tell me that all that I am comes from this, ah… from this “.” From this dot. Really?

Eventually it took me three books, the Alexander Trilogy to tackle the consequences resulting from these concepts. To make them real—acceptable to our mindsets conditioned to accept the evidence of our senses as real—as mundane reality. I begun with imagination, advanced to intellectual concepts, and finished with the spiritual ‘angle’.

We have two choices.

We can assume that human sperm, which needs to be magnified 400x to be visible, and the egg, that is the size of the dot at the end of this sentence, contains all the information necessary to produce, interconnect and harmonize (some say as many as) 100 trillion cells and equip it with a further ten times as many, say 1000  trillion micro-organisms in the intestines to make my body function properly.

Please note: it is proposed that a single sperm and the penetrated egg contains ALL the necessary information to produce and execute an organism such as you or I.

That’s right. All contained in the ovum the size of this (.) dot.

That’s the scientific approach.

The second approach is that exactly the same thing happens but the function of  ‘growing’ a human body is guided and controlled by a mind, or a disembodied consciousness, which is not limited to the microscopic size or biological restrictions. It is a mind that is building a vehicle for itself, through which it will be able to develop new ideas, rather as I am using this computer to do so.

A wonderful computer.

A most wonderful brain.

The concept of omnipresent intelligence would help. As mentioned above, I used the idea in my book Alexander, part two of the Alexander Trilogy. Let me know what you think. 

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on Amazon for Alexander. Your thoughts are important to me. For a free download contact mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Obesity

Linus Pauling, the renowned American double Nobel Prize winner, argued that there was a time, when Homo sapiens belonged to organisms known as herbivora, or devourers of plants. He based his claim on the teeth in the human mouth. The incisors are necessary for cutting, the premolars and molars are suitable for grinding our food, and the canines or fangs, necessary for tearing meat apart, are virtually nonexistent. Evolution, he argued, has equipped us with teeth necessary for successful survival.

Only… things change.

Since the good old days when we were agrarian societies, some of us became hunters and gatherers. It is the hunters who created the problems. Not only our teeth but also our whole organisms were not well disposed towards it. For example, as we increased our consumption of meat, we run short of vitamin C. Previously abundant for millions of years in our daily diet, our bodies had no need to produce it’s own. Without the supplement, the ancient mariners developed scurvy and a number of other illnesses.

As for tearing food apart, we found a brilliant way out. Not only a knife and fork helped, but also the vast majority of the Western world developed a taste for hamburgers. Not only was tearing of food no longer necessary but the meat was already ground to a pulp, pre-masticated for easy absorption by badly equipped human mouths.

Only one problem remained.

Herbivores, which according to our teeth, we still are, tend to graze most of the time. We did so, for millions of years to assure our survival. Habits seldom change, and now that meat replaced the essentials of our daily diet we continue to eat most of the time, consuming vastly too many calories, and running terribly short of vitamins, minerals and other nutrients, available only from the food we gave up, yet on which our bodies ‘grazed’ for the said millions of years. 

It has been said that the North Americans and Western Europeans of the Human species are the most overfed and, simultaneously, the most undernourished species on Earth.

Over the years the so-called poor became fat, then obese, while the rich, with the possible exception of some Arab sheiks and Central American and African dictators, remained slim and healthy. Perhaps the poor became poor in spirit, rather than in cultivating their physical contours that would attest to their wellbeing. Don’t get me wrong. There are still poor in most western cities. They are the homeless, the rejects of our society, who huddle in dark corners, at night, to preserve their body heat. They are the true poor. Not those living on the handouts of affluent society of predominantly fat people.

Could it be that the real poor are the rich in spirit?

Perhaps the real Homo sapiens is different altogether, regardless of what we eat. See if you agree with Thomas’s observations in Key to Immortality. Perhaps human life has little to do with what we eat. Perhaps…

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on the Amazon for Key. Your thoughts are important to me. 

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Reviewers, ask for FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Back Home

After spending some weeks down south, bathing in Florida sunshine, after a 26 hour drive through drizzle and sleet, Canada welcomed me with a handful of snow.  

Home sweet home.

Only on my return, it came to me, why I like the States so much. The great thing I found was that in sheer numbers there are more nice and intelligent people in the USA than here, back home. Of course, there are 10 times as many Americans as there are Canadians.

We all know the expression: “One in a million.”

Ergo, if the ‘few’ are, say, 1 in a 1,000,000, than automatically the USA has 30 times as many bright people as we have. About 300 hundred of them. Doesn’t seem like much until you realize that we, Canadian, hardly qualify to claim 30.

What exacerbates the problem even more is that, more often than not, a Canadian who is really smart all too soon packs his bags and runs down south, seeking greener pastures (less snow?). Some say that in Hollywood you have to be Black, Jewish, Gay or Canadian to be a success. I wouldn’t know. I’ve never been to Hollywood.

Not fair.

If we had the USA climate, they would run up to us. Just wait till the poles reverse. Again. Or when even greater surprises happen, such as described in Enigma of the Second Coming. Read for yourself.

But the important thing is that even the ‘many’, again down south, seem to be nice and helpful. Total strangers greeted me with a smile on my morning jogs on public sidewalks. In spite of the reputation that some of the ‘many’ are doing their very best to create, not a single one of the people I met appeared to be carrying a gun, a assault weapon, or any other instrument of mass destruction. In fact I’d bet my bottom dollar, Canadian or American—they are at par now, that not one of them would hurt a fly, let alone a jogging elderly Canadian.

Perhaps the fact that the vast majority of people I passed were well over 60, or even 70, may have had something to do with it. I don’t care. I strongly advise the prospective travelers not to listen to the News, not to believe the statistics. The people I met, even in passing, were all nice and friendly, and I’d recommend the West Coast of Florida to any and all Canadians. Perhaps all 300 live down there?

Only please, don’t say hi, or hey. Not even a British ‘hello’. Say Good Morning. That’s what they say there. Even in the afternoon…

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on the Amazon for Enigma. Your thoughts are important to me.

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Reviewers, ask for FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Second Amendment

To use the immortal words of the late (though still immortal) bard of American letters, Thomas Andrew Lehrer, “I just sit there looking cute, and when something moves I shoot.” This is, surely, the essence of the Second Amendment.

To be more precise, the said Amendment states: “A well regulated militia being necessary to security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” So it said in 1791, and so it is now. Nothing, I repeat, nothing has changed.

And who is better at regulating militia than the citizens of a free country. Surely, only a well-equipped militia can protects its citizen from abuses of a duly elected government and its armed hordes designed to infringe on individual liberty. Shame!

Liberté, égalité, fraternité, said our (not so liked but nevertheless) brothers from across the pond, and they were right! (Actually I wouldn’t know, I’m from Canada, but so I am told by my very friendly brothers from down-south, hey?).

Nevertheless, when my dear American friend read this stuff I wrote above, he asked me to offer some advice. And therefore, since I am friendlily disposed towards my southern friends, I rush (not to be confused with Rush) with aid and advice. I couldn’t agree more that the 2nd Amendment is a great way to protect the Citizenry, but not the only way. Also, what worked in 1791 will not work, necessarily, in 2013. And anyway, why always compromise? They never work. Not really!

I propose the 1st Amendment to the 2nd Amendment!

To play absolutely safe, and protect the people from the abuses of an oppressive government (or the Democratic Party), I propose that all guns be withdrawn from the armed forces and the police, and given to the people. Nobody but nobody can protect people from each other as well as people. And the more people are shot, the fewer would be likely to shoot back. A double win situation. 

Furthermore, freedom would be preserved, the taxes would go down if not be eliminated altogether, and we could all revert to the good old days of 1791, or even earlier.

Long live the gun owners, especially those who are still alive. And as an added bonus, you can all benefit from more of my friendly wisdom expressed in my other deep philosophical treatises such as Sci-Fi Series 1. Try them at your own risk.

LOL?

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on the Amazon for

Sci-Fi 1. Your thoughts are important to me. 

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Reviewers, ask for FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Eternity

Eternity is a very, very long time. At the same time, it is shorter than an instant. If you eliminate time and space from the equation of reality, only NOW remains. Like that that must have been before the Big Bang.

Like God?

No past—no future. Neither a beginning—nor end. Time only comes in handy to stop everything happening at once. Also, to help us understand eternity. In my book Visualization—Creating Your Own Universe, I discuss various aspects of time. You might find it interesting. It might also confuse you, but that’s not my fault. In that book I am little more than a reporter. My contribution is nominal.

What is the true meaning of eternity?

For those who practice various religions it means that god neither was, nor will be, but IS. Even as in I AM THAT I AM. The eternal present. All else is but an illusion.

What time enables us to do is to bring out the knowledge that already exists within our unconscious into the open. To bring is out into our awareness. It is an ongoing process. And, since our unconscious is beyond the properties of physical reality, it falls into the category of infinite. It is integral with eternity. You can call it divine, if you like, although I doubt that would make it any clearer.

I like to call the process of awakening to our inherent potential—becoming. As discussed in my novel, NOW—Being & Becoming it is an eternal endeavour. It really does go on forever. Why not? After all, we are all indivisible expressions of the Eternal Now. That’s what ‘individual’ means—indivisible, and we are all individuals, aren’t we?

I cannot even attempt to explain the concepts involved, let alone the consequences resulting from the Eternal Now in a short blog, but my novel will serve to share with you some ideas. You might or might not agree. I’d be happy to hear your thoughts. Only remember, thoughts are things—bundles of creative energy. They are what our universe is made of. Your thoughts may well become the reality you’ll be stuck with for a long, long time. Good luck.

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on the Amazon for

NOW. Your thoughts are important to me.

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Reviewers, ask for FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

The Problem with Ubiquity

As Baruch Spinoza would not recognize the God of Abraham, or the Christian God, he got kicked out from the Jewish congregation. Spinoza was a Jewish-Dutch philosopher, who refused to ascribe human traits to God, no matter how divinely improved. On July 27, 1656, the Talmud Torah congregation of Amsterdam issued a cherem against him. In Hebrew, cherem means ban, shunning, ostracism, expulsion or excommunication. The Jewish society did so when Baruch was 23. Following his shunning, Baruch died at the age 44.

It bears mentioning that attempting to define god is as impossible as defining infinity, omnipotence, or ubiquity. Once you define them, you set limit on them, and, surely, you’d not want to set limits on your god, would you?

Anyone who wishes to learn about “Spinoza’s God” must, surely, find out what was it about his beliefs that deserved banning. But be careful. Albert Einstein said: “I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.”

That’s a fairly good recommendation coming from a very Jewish gentleman. Was Einstein a ‘believer’? Not by any religious definition. He was my mine. Orderly harmony of what exists. I’d add of what did or could exist.

By the same token, there is a big problem with infinity and particularly with ubiquity. Let’s face it. If god is omnipresent, then I must be, by definition, within god. By the same argument, god must be within me. There is absolutely no way out of this congruity. Perhaps that is why a man, some two thousand years ago claimed that the two are inseparable. They are one.

Even… as we are. You and I.

And it follows that if anyone cannot find divinity within their own potential, within their own ‘soul’, they are unlikely to find it in any temple, church or synagogue. Not even in nature. Or anywhere else. After all, all else is Maya—an illusion. Sooner or later we arrive at the conclusion that the seeker and that which he seeks are one—the perceiver and the perceived. For some reason, most of us seem to prefer to base our realities on Delusions. I wonder why. I gather, so did Einstein.

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review on the Amazon for

Delusions. Your thoughts are important to me.

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Ask about FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Decision Makers

The fact that out of the many only a few have emerged to claim their divine heritage, does not make those few ‘good’. In fact, being counted among the few has absolutely no influence on their moral or ethical standing. What it does do is to endow them, those few, with the latent power, which we all harbour within our unconscious. All that the few had accomplished was to bring out the power latent powers within them into the open. They brought out a fragment of infinity into their conscious mind, into the tip of the iceberg. Those “chosen few” became aware of who they are—of the incredible potential lying in the deeps of the sea. Within the endless ocean of thoughts.

When Jacob changed his name to Israel, he was inspired to be fruitful and multiply. Not to pollute the earth with human sperm until billions of us will make this reality inhospitable to human life. He was told to multiply his thoughts in pursuit of his infinite potential. To bring those thoughts, those ideas, into the open. Try my Dictionary of Biblical Symbolism, to learn more. You’ll learn also what the name Israel means.

And now those few have to make a choice. To be gods or devils. Mother Theresas or Hitlers. Both paths are now available to them. Both are theirs to claim. Until we become aware of our heritage, we do not really exercise the gift of free will. We are in a reactive mode. Like all animals.

Henceforth, however, it is our choice.

This is the true meaning of free will. It only comes into being when we became aware of who we are.

And this is where our true journey starts. In my collection of essays Beyond Religion III, I describe the ensuing becoming in the essay #52, I try to describe the condition which a liberated mind has to face. It is a long study. The journey on which we set out ends in infinity.

So, you see, gods have completely different problems to face.

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review for BR III. Your thoughts are important to me.

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Reviewers, ask for FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Seventh Heaven

Or the 77th heaven. In his letter to Corinthians, Paul of Tarsus writes that he once knew a man, “Caught up in third heaven…” The number seems of little importance. What is important is that there are various degrees of heavenly states, more precisely states of consciousness, which may, one day, be accessible to us. We begin in the heaven of our own creation, the direct result of our lives here, on Earth, and gradually advance to higher states of consciousness. Perhaps those, too, we must devise by our own efforts. I strongly suspect that this is so.

Ultimately we experience merging with the Whole, both potential and manifested Universe, and our individualized journey is over. Perhaps this is what Buddha meant by nirvana—the complete loss of self-awareness, of individuality, of ego.

On Earth, in the dualistic reality, we need ego to assure our physical survival. Later, once we become more aware of higher realities, it seems to drop off as an encumbrance.

This may take us a few billion years, for some longer. Those who succeed will make room for new individualizations of consciousness, which will go on, and on, and on well beyond any eons human mind is capable of imagining.

World without end.

Or beginning, for that matter.

Of course, few of us are aware when we actually began our journey. As embryonic-egos we begin early, perhaps at the level of an amoeba. It, the mono-cellular entity, is probably aware of its physical boundaries, thus defining itself as separate from “the other”, even as we do. The difference is, however, that we tend to add to our “self” all our accoutrements, our knickknacks that we consider as necessary to sate our need of self-importance.

All such paraphernalia are strictly illusory, and serve only to indicate to us the transiency of the present awareness we experience on Earth. The less attached we become, the less suffering we shall experience when such accoutrements dissolve in the Maya of time.

No matter how many times we travel the wheel of Awagawan, the cycle of rebirth, we shall continue to do so until we learn the lessons necessary to free us from our attachments. Then, and only then, we shall advance to “first heaven”, which is usually the only heaven available to practitioners of most if not all religions. Probably the most important lesson, or at the first one we must adopt is that the present reality, the dualistic reality of the material world is an illusion. The nearest most people will get to the foretaste, the antechamber of first heaven is in their dreams.

Good night.

Another versions of heaven are discussed in my collection of essays, Beyond Religion II. Take your pick.

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review for BR II. Your thoughts are important to me.

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Reviews, ask for FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

History in our Bones

There is more to our genome than meets the eye. The genome we carry today originates in amoeba—a genus of Protozoa, consisting of shapeless unicellular organisms. Except for the number of cells, it reminds me of some people I know. Yet, some 300 million years ago, giant amoebas swam the seas of the Earth. And then something happened. The single cell split, then split again. Now we, humans, consist of some 100 trillion cells. Give or take a few billion amoebas—I mean cells.

Yes, we, the Homo sapiens are the sum-total of everything that happened in nature over at least the last 300 millions of years. We’ve learned to eat everything that moves. Nobody eats us, or at least, not often. We are at the very top of the food chain. We, after millions of year of being vegetarian, have become carnivores.

Why? Because we like to assert our superiority. Some fundamentalists will assert that the god told us to do so. Also, we like to kill. We are a species of killers.

Well, most of us.

The fact remains that if Darwin was right, then we began our journey towards self-awareness some millions of years ago. My cat is aware of herself. But I am aware that I am aware. A mere 5000 years ago our primitive predecessors realized that since the omnipresent creative force is ubiquitous it must, by definition, also be present within us. Now, I know that, “I am that I am”. I am aware that I evolved thanks to some forces that are beyond my comprehension. The question remains, is the difference between an amoeba and me only the number of cells and their relation to each other?

Or is the difference between an amoeba and us in that we are aware of this difference. Doesn’t the difference lie in the degree of our awareness?

Cartesians say that, “I think therefore I am”.

I say, “I am aware, therefore I am”.

Virtually all men and women I ever met believe that there is an external force, quite apart from us, which controls us, determines our welfare, adjudicates our future.

In a way, they are right.

We are the individualizations of that external force which created an amoeba. The rest is history. In order to qualify for the assurances of the great masters of the past (and very few of the present) all we need do is to make a tiny adjustment in our point of view. We all believe in the invisible—theoretical physics is the best proof for that. And now all we need do is to accept that we are not human animals possessed of a soul, but invisible, indestructible units of consciousness, which express themselves through a complex organism consisting of trillions of cells. Who knows what we might create next?

Two thousand years ago, Peter and Paul had been forced to face the same problem. It is a problem of faith. That’s all it takes. Faith like a grain of mustard seed.

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review for Peter & Paul. Your thoughts are important to me. 

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Reviewers, ask for FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Making History

It has happened before, a number of times. But the last time that a pope resigned was in 1415. His name was Celestine V. He was a recluse, who only reluctantly accepted his election. Soon he fled to the mountains, but did not run far enough. His successor, Boniface VIII, afraid of competition, had him caught and imprisoned for the rest of his life. Later, Celestine was declared a saint. Boniface wasn’t. Guess why.

They are strange people, some of those popes.

Recently, I witnessed the farewell afforded Benedict XVI. A tired old man. He took a helicopter to Castel Gandolfo overlooking Lake Albano, where he’ll spend the rest of his life. Behind bars? You never know with popes.  Benedict is a tired old man, yet I doubt Gandolfo is far enough from Vatican to keep him safe. Just 15 miles from Rome. Actually, there is already talk that Gandolfo is only temporary. Soon, the ex-pope will be sequestered in an apartment in Vatican. Easier to keep an eye on him, I suppose.

The farewell was a solemn occasion. Towards the end some 125 cardinals, all decked out in the colour of blood approached the old man. The official princes of the church lined up to kiss the pope’s hand twice (it could have been his ring). Isn’t this pretty much what Judas did just before they arrested his master?

And then something struck me as peculiar.

As the 125 emissaries of Christ approached the departing pope, they took turns to genuflect before the emissary of god. Since the Church teaches that god is omnipresent, when cardinals genuflected before the departing pope Benedict, it looked very much like a divine rite of mutual adoration.

Gods kneeling before gods.

Some gods must be more equal than others, I thought. Probably true. Some years ago, about 2000 or so, the Greeks had the same problem with the gods of Olympus. Some were more important gods than others. Later the Romans followed suit by arranging them in order of importance and placed them on the tallest mountain in Thessaly. A different kind of Olympus. A little like Castel Gandolfo and Vatican.

It seems that the Greeks, the Romans, and now the 125 cardinals from 51 countries had reached the same conclusion. They concluded that some gods are more equal than others. And, well, you might as well play safe and genuflect before them. Until the next god appears. Then they’ll genuflect before him. And so on, and so on.

Of course, neither Vatican nor Gandolfo are mountains, but at least they are hills. Perhaps gods are not as important as they used to be.

On the other hand, we now have many gods to choose from. 125 of them. And one will soon be elevated to the highest throne—the throne of Peter, created by Paul. And all other gods will genuflect before him. Perhaps they’ll also kiss his red loafers.

Why is it that people need gods so much?

As for the complexities of the election of the next pope, try my Headless World—The Vatican Incident. You might actually like it.

PS. Please, don’t forget to write a brief review for Headless World. Your thoughts are important to me.

My webpage is http://stanlaw.ca.

Ask about FREE downloads at mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca