Orthodoxy - Teaching and experiments (Tape 46)
Pride and vanity have many, many faces. Many are very, very subtle, and it is considered to be "death" because pride and vanity get a person to come to a conclusion--to have a very exalted idea of the "self". It is the nature of the four dual basic urges, of mammon. It is the ultimate "ideal", "I know what ought to be." One of the ways we see this come, (pride and vanity), about in a very subtle way is the developing of an "orthodoxy."
Whenever someone comes up with a new idea, he makes a discovery; and the older ideas, (having their pride and vanity), usually attack the new arising idea as being a heresy-improper-wrong--fraudulent and what have you. Then of course, the founder of the new idea begins to demand tolerance. He wants to be tolerated. He wants to present his ideas. He screams against the evils of orthodoxy, and he points out how orthodoxy has been the brake on the growth of human understanding and well-being on the face of the earth. Always he, with the new idea, can find that orthodoxy was the source of his difficulty; and of course, all others. He sees orthodoxy as that which is very set--exact, "we-know-this-is-right-nothing-else"--any deviation from their idea is, of course, fraudulent--in error-wrong--evil, and what have you. So the newcomer always finds that his enemy is orthodoxy.
However, it is interesting to observe that over a number of years the newcomer finally gains a certain amount of strength--a certain amount of followers, and a certain amount of people who agree with him. Then, sooner or later, the new one ceases to be concerned with having tolerance--now that he has gained a certain amount of power. Of course, orthodoxy is second force to him; and so he had to work hard--he had to be diligent in his way, and he established something new. Now the new idea is well established and beginning to be accepted by a great number of people. The general "new idea accepted as being right."
Now we will see the new one begin to form an orthodoxy;and anything that is at variance with the idea "he has propounded" begins to be considered "unorthodox,"--begins to be considered to be an evil thing--a fraud--something that "shouldn't be." So "pride and vanity" have won again. He begins to defend all his new ideas, and why there "should be" no obstruction to it. He probably will gain the ability to get government support to protect his vested interests in the idea that has now become orthodox.
This has been observed through the ages in about everything. One of the obvious ones are the religious ideas. Someone came up with a religious idea and a certain means of teaching it. It was a religion--it was a school--it was teaching people; and they were profiting by it against the great adversary of the one previous orthodoxy which was second force to the newcomer. It was very wonderful that it does have that second force.
But, sooner or later, someone arises who has vanity; and they say "This is the way it is, and there can be no changes from this. This is the ultimate."
The story is told that in ancient China, which was the most advanced nation in the world called "The Celestial Kingdom,"--that all the people were pursuing understanding. They had gunpowder when the west was still throwing rocks at each other. They had more sophisticated means of killing--supposedly. They had silk when the rest of the people in the world were practically dressed in skins or very crude rough cloth. They had many sciences and understood metallurgy and were making ornaments of gold and silver. They had mechanisms that were saving human labor.
Then along came a man named Confucius and Confucius sat down to make everything orthodox--this was the ultimate. So then it became: "Confucius says." That was the ultimate answer. This was the orthodoxy. The great Kingdom became static; and while they were still far ahead of any other nation, many of them who had no orthodoxy, sooner or later, came up to be even in their development, in their culture; and ultimately it was passed by most of the other countries of the world.
Various religious ideas have met the same fate. The Judaic religion started out that man would do what "seemed right" in his own eyes. They had judges who had no power to enforce their edicts or their judgments; but when two or more people were in conflict, they came to the judges; and the judges, (by their show of wisdom), made each see WHAT IS--that they really had no argument. Both conflicting parties went away feeling quite wonderful about the whole thing. The people began to be around and observe these hearings; and to observe the wisdom of the men called judges who were really teachers of the time who could point out the "real thing that was going on in people". But, then, these ideas were written down; and pretty soon, they became an orthodoxy. So then they wanted a King so they would have someone to defend the orthodoxy; and it became a sect. Then it became the prey of every power-seeking group in the world and was scattered abroad from far and wide.
Then they came to have the Ten Commandments. [*note ] Now, the commandments were given to show man THAT HE HAD MANY INNER THINGS THAT WERE IN CONFLICT, that he had a "self"; and while certain aspects of the "self" wanted to live by the commandments--certain other aspects of the "self" didn't want to. So the commandments were a challenge to self-knowing. But they gradually became something with which to put on a front. Finally we read of the Scribes and Pharisees having all their many rituals; and each of the rituals had some meaning. The washing of hands, instead of not only being simple good manners and sanitary, it was also to wash away the accumulation of the "self", to be sure that the awareness was clean--that it was without conditioning or suggestion from the past few hours; and "that this inner self was washed" also. But it finally came to be just to wash hands; and that became the orthodoxy. People had to live by the new rules and regulations.
With Christianity came along the idea of baptism--being washed from guilt--from missing the mark, and carrying accumulated accounts against other people. That deteriorated into a ritual; and then the ritual began to be orthodox. All the other ideas of the TEACHING (confession-surrender--repentance) all became ritualized. Now, they only had the ritual; and that was the orthodoxy. No one deviated so much as a little bit.
Now, of course, when Christianity started, it was persecuted far and wide. Everybody was opposed; but finally it became power under Constantine the Great. Then it, too, became ritualized; and the outward form of Christianity became only a ritual. THE RITUAL WAS SUPPOSED TO DO WHAT IT WAS A SYMBOL OF?-but, of course, men went on in their agony, misery, wars, conflicts and struggles because they only had the outward form.
Various brands of the healing art have come along. Medicine at one time was looked down on--was considered to be low because the church was supreme over it; but gradually they gained power. It then became an orthodoxy. Along came a man named Hahnemann, and he founded Homeopathy. Of course, it was attacked by all the orthodox at that time. Then it became strong enough, sooner or later, that it could establish its own orthodoxy, and it died.
Some time later came the idea of Osteopathy by a man named Still. At first he demanded freedom of healing so that all things could be tried and that orthodoxy shouldn't stamp him out. Gradually over a period of time, against tremendous odds of second force, of resistance from orthodoxy, he developed quite a healing art system. Then, of course, he established an orthodoxy. Anyone who didn't "toe the line" was considered to be a mixer--some kind of fraud; and gradually it died and was considered to be just another branch of the general idea of medicine.
Along came the Palmers and set up chiropractic; and they demanded tolerance, and that there be no stifling of their efforts by orthodoxy. Sooner or later, they gained a certain amount of power and established an orthodoxy. Anyone who didn't "hew the line" was considered to be a heretic, a mixer, an evil person; and of course, it began to fall apart and is today a weakling in the whole field of endeavor.
So in everything that comes about, one sees the orthodoxy. Now the only thing that has not been caught up in the orthodoxy is the SCHOOLS. They have been kept fresh and alive. Each person who teaches uses his or her own methods to try to transmit and communicate "to those whom they work with" the fundamentals of the experimentation techniques. There is no orthodoxy in the SCHOOLS. There is something that you can experiment with. You can experiment anyway you please. No one gives you the specific experiment. They give you a guideline.
Now the schools have operated under hundreds and hundreds of different techniques used by different teachers. To mention only a few, there was the study of chemistry wherein each thing was seen as a symbol. When two substances would unite, there was a new substance which was the symbol of the union of awareness and X; and a new man came into being. They studied certain things which were incompatible and could not be joined together. They also studied many things that while they could be joined together, they were injured in one way or other due to contaminants. They found out that things that adulterated their various chemical seams would prevent the union of things, so they began to study the adulteration which was a symbol of the "self" which obstructed the union of awareness and X.
So much study went on in these worlds using these various methods. Other people and other teachers just as effectively used studying the courses of the stars and planets, showing that there is a general course of events that goes along, that man starts out far to the south, far away from the light, and gradually goes toward the light.
They studied things like the equinox and all the other things--such as the solstice and had understanding of these. These, of course, on the outward schools deteriorated into things like astrology and so forth. But the school continued on under some means of using some everyday principle--some everyday event that could be used as a parallel of which almost every one can be.
Certain others used the healing arts, and used the many things that they saw in the various symptoms of man; and how they came about, and the healing art at one time was in the form of a school. But it gradually deteriorated in the outward form---into an orthodoxy of healing.
Then there were the builders. They used the building techniques, and the tools of building to show relationships, and to point out how things worked--what would interfere--how unusual things could come into being--how an arch could be made. All of these were some symbol of the new man; and of the tools he used to gain that estate as a new man--using the same ideas, but putting them in a different frame of reference so that there was no orthodoxy.
Then there came the storytellers. They told many stories and sang little songs. They were called the troubadours. They taught over the continent of Europe for many, many years. On the outward side they were entertainers, clowns, or storytellers. On the inner side, all the stories were understood for their inner meaning; and of course, the idea of using stories to parallel the inner meaning has been used through the ages as fables, parables, teaching stories, and supposed historical events. In other words, the story is cast around some actual historical happening; but it is stylized to bring out the various inner points. Many of us are acquainted with the great story "Gone With The Wind" which had an actual historical setting in the Civil War South. Many of us know that it is only fiction; but if someone should come upon it (and not know all the history surrounding it and what the purpose was in writing it), one might think that Rhett Butler and Scarlet O'Hara were actual living people at one time or other. Of course, they were fictional characters that illustrated the general ideas of the time.
Then there has been poetry. Most of us are familiar with the Psalms. There are many other brands of poetry. Possibly, some of you are acquainted with the Song of Solomon, which is a story of man's struggle for integration to know himself - to be one. The spouse is called the Dusky Queen; and of course, many people have taken that as a historical event; and that she was the Queen of Sheba. However, it is a beautiful poem that is cast in the story of the man knowing self, and the union of X and awareness. There are many other forms of poetry around the world that all illustrate. Many are cast in the symbols of human sexual love--of eros--the attraction--the union that brings about the new man.
Of course, there are servants and many ways of serving. People are considered to be slaves, and slaves did not always mean someone owned. It meant, at one time, only a servant who serves freely and gladly; and there are many stories about a slave master and slave--a king and his slave, where the slave would not take over the kingdom even though it was offered to him. He saw that serving X was the greatest good for awareness in all the world because that is the way the union of X and awareness comes about - that awareness is a good and faithful servant. It does what it is supposed to do; and does it with joy--without hoping for a reward, or escaping any pain. The servant--the slave, hopes for no reward because he's owned; and he, of course, does not expect punishment as long as he does what he is "going on" to do. So without regard to pleasure or pain, he serves; and the story is told that the king loves the servant.
One of the stories, most of us are acquainted with, is the story of Joseph and the Pharaoh of Egypt. Joseph was a slave to the Pharaoh; and the Pharaoh loved Joseph after a certain length of time--and all the many other things. Finally things get reversed and Joseph, I believe, was to have married the Queen of Egypt at one time.
Then there was the group known as blade makers, the Damascus Sword. There was the observing of the change in steel from rough iron--pig iron--going through various refinements, (tempers, being struggled with, being heated and tempered by being immersed in oil or water, or what have you). This was representative of man in his delight with the TEACHING--THAT HE WAS CONSTANTLY BEING SUBJECTED TO SECOND FORCES; BUT THAT HE CONTINUED ON ANYWAY. The great Damascus blade was the symbol of the completed man--the "perfected" man--and each of the workers who worked in this gradually understood the symbol. They were working with in their hands--the great craftsmen making the Damascus blade. Later it was practiced in Spain and was called the Toledo blade, which was a duplicate of the Damascus sword - another school, but using the same methods. So no orthodoxy became established in any direction anywhere.
The TEACHING is always to what the person, who has experienced all the way from confession, surrender, repentance, baptism, being a new man, seeing differently, experiencing GRACE, AGAPE and FAITH, can always devise some means that he can use a symbolic expression.
Today, sometimes we may use the picture of man as a parable to show how man came into the world--what happened to him--how he gradually became a totally conditioned being--how by I awakening from among the dead conclusions, rises up like the prodigal son, goes to his Father--begins to be a servant--submits to being a slave--and finds that a love--an understanding--a union takes place between X and awareness.
There are many ways one can find--there are no limits to the ways one can find a parallel. Under no circumstance does any orthodoxy arise because before one could be able to find some means to be able to carry the parallel, (and not make the parallel into the orthodoxy; and to confuse the symbol with the real thing), one would have to see a certain amount of pride and vanity long enough that it would be destroyed. It says in the scripture that the last enemy to be overcome is "death", and pride and vanity are considered to be "death". So the very last enemy that man has is pride and vanity in whatever form it may take. The not I's get more subtle, and they can convince I that this is for the good of the people--not allowing them to deviate.
It is much like the story told that long ago when all the souls were formed. Lucifer (mammon) came out and told his story as to how he would return them all--that he would force them--he would give them no opportunity--in other words, they would be instinctive people, like cats and dogs.
The Great Messiah, the other brother, came and told how he would do it. He would allow them to have the opportunity to evolve under their own power to come back; and he would not guarantee that they would all come back.
Of course, the latter method was used, and we do experience it; but we do see that many of the people who claim to follow the Christ are trying to practice it by Lucifer's method of making it impossible, wanting to control people, making an orthodoxy so they will have to be "good," but not CONSCIOUS. Of course, this is being caught in pride and vanity, forming some sort of an orthodoxy that certainly vanity and pride (in the person who formed it) said, "This is the way - it is for the good of the people," and, you know, no one can do anything unless they feel it's right, proper and justifiable; but by pride and vanity one can make almost any atrocity seem, as if it were, for the good of the people; and that force-coercion-suggestion, and everything is in order as long as it is for the "good" of the people.
You see, under AGAPE, the Kingdom of Heaven, there is consideration--there is harmlessness--and there is a contribution; but there is no force. There is no "doing good." There is only being harmless. To try to point out to a person--to try to convince them that they are not responsible--that somebody else should do it, and that they "should believe and do as they are told by their authorities", is to attempt to take away their responsibility. This possibly is the greatest form of harm that is done.
You see, whenever we begin to protect people--take care of them, (we are not talking about doing something for them when they are rendered incapable, but as long as they are up and about and not in the state the man was in, in the parable of the Good Samaritan, but that they are capable - they may be lost in their way, but that they are still capable - to give them "help," to do "good" for them)-is to treat them as though they were not responsible people. And to treat anyone as not being responsible is to further put them in bondage. You know, most every person wants to be free. Freedom, of course, is FREEDOM TO; but on the other side of the coin of FREEDOM TO is RESPONSIBILITY - being able to respond!
The more we treat a person "as being able to respond", the more we can let them "see for themselves" that they are ABLE TO RESPOND, and that THEY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR EVOLVEMENT. We can give them a roadmap or give them some tools; but they have to use the tools. It is as though a man said, "Here is a field and here are some tools." Then one could go out and earn his own food from the land with the use of the tools. You could just "give him the food" which would "look" so much better. It would "gain one" so much more "approval" than if you treat the man as though he is responsible. Here are the tools - you may use them - they are not yours - they are loaned to you - here is the field - it is not given to you - it is loaned to you - now it's up to you - you can produce your own food.
This is the way we all are when we come to the point of being aware of the self--to evolving into a new person--to experience rebirth--to experience the spiritual experiences. Only counterfeits can be provided by emotional settings-only counterfeits "can be had" by telling people that "you have this because you have been dipped in the water", or "someone has laid their hands on you"--It still has to come from within--from one's own experimentation.
As one does this, one is treating everyone, (including this one), as being responsible; and one isn't building an orthodoxy because each has to go THE WAY for self. It is not something that says, "Do this, and this shall happen to you"--do this--believe this, and you will have so and so." It is finding out for self, and there are many ways to run the experiment.
We have named only a few of those experiments. There have been hundreds and hundreds more; and as we begin to look, we can see, possibly, these experiments being run in ways we never dreamed of, wherever we look.
[* note ] Sometime through the years of study, I saw a document where my teacher described how the ten commandments can be used for inner study instead of a show of outward behavior; however, I've been unable to locate the paper again to put on this web site.