MY RIGHT TO QUESTION
by K.L.M. Kathel ©1985
Copyright, by Cosmeta ©1997
Two topics are off limits: religion and politics. As young maturing adults , how often have we heard that? How often we kept silent. Politics is not the purpose of this essay---religion and spirituality are. For the few, religion has always fascinated; and for me, so has Spiritual Metaphysics.
Non-church-goers are not necessarily atheistic, nor are they agnostic. It is not that we do not wish to talk about religion or other related topics such as philosophy, psychic phenomena or metaphysics. That was never the problem---at least for me. On the contrary, very often we wish to spend more time engrossed in quality discussion. The difficulty is more in this. Except for Saturdays at temple and Sundays at church, (or weekly metaphysical meetings) for example, few care to listen. When dealing with the laity, few care to partake in deep soul searching questions. For a spiritual non-church-goer, one who is hell bent on obtaining answers, the result very often is silence. I for one, am silent no more.
The Knight-Errant Of Romance
Even Rene' Descartes, the great modern thinker, said in essence, that truth is to be found nowhere---and thus, out of all the information presented to us for study and evaluation---out of all the confusing and confounding ideas, it is only our own personal version of the truth that has any validity for us at all. He said:
"Besides, Fables make one imagine many events possible which in reality are not so, and even the most accurate of histories, if they do not exactly misrepresent or exaggerate the value of things in order to render them more worthy of being read, at least omit in them all the circumstances that are basest and notable; and from this fact it follows that what is retained is not portrayed as it really is, and that those who regulate their conduct by examples derive from such a source, are liable to fall into extravagances of the knight-errant of Romance, and form projects beyond their power of performance."
"The European Philosophers:
from Descartes to Nietzsche,"
Edited by Monroe C. Beardsley, page 8.
Abstract Concepts And Ideas
I must admit that I cannot retain facts accurately enough to present a scholarly masterpiece quoting directly from bonafide sources. I cannot even understand the full scope and depth to which these eloquent authors have written. The combination of letters and language used by the scholarly elite simply escapes me. If I cannot understand even their letters, then how in heaven's name am I to ever grasp the full import of their doctrines. All that I do know is that I can easily comprehend abstract ideas and concepts.
My Right To Question is about concepts and about abstract ideas. It is intended with an object of simplicity in mind. In all of my reading, and with all of the people I personally have met in my life, it dawned on me, that there are perhaps hundreds if not thousands of people, who are, like myself, Ordinary Individuals. We have a great desire to know the truth. Very often, however, that desire is hampered by a lack of scholastic achievement. Now, I am not saying that the Ordinary Individual is not intelligent---dear me no. If you've ever heard Shakespeare's expression, "sounds Greek to me," you'll know what I mean.Subconscious Implants.
Scholars write for scholars; then in a descending fashion, information is passed along. Unaware, impregnation of ideas infiltrates society at all levels. This is especially true of philosophy. Either intuitively or by way of indoctrination, we come to accept or reject; eventually forming our common belief systems. Frequently, those belief systems are so ingrained, we no longer question their origins. They have become subconscious implants. It does not even seem to matter whether they are really ours or not. But sometimes, we do question; and we question because we are not sure. We are not sure that what we have come to believe is really a valid truth.
This essay is not a scholarly document. Neither am I a scholar. I do not claim to possess Absolute Truth. What I offer to those who are willing to accept it, is my version of that truth. "For those who will hear, let him hear." It is hoped that the reader will easily comprehend what I have to say about metaphysics and psychic phenomenon in general, whereas they cannot comprehend others. It is with this view in mind that I write---and I do so, knowing full well that I could never compete with the masters of past and present. So, I concede---no contest!
The Best System Is No System
But, for all those, both male and female alike, who are seeking after the truth in a down to earth simple language; I'd like to state, that my views, if ever they appear obscure because I do not adhere to any one formula or dogma---then I can only say; very often, the best system is no system at all.
God Is A Family
To Plato, God was 'Ultimate Good'. To Pythagoras, God was 'Number'. To Aristotle, God was 'First Philosophy'. To Jesus, God was 'Love'. To Thomas Aquinas, God was 'Jesus'. To Descartes God was'Thought' --- And to me, God is 'A Family'.
Yes, I will agree with Descartes, that I exist because I am a thinking being; but more than this, I exist and therefore God exist, because I was born out of my mother's womb. In this, I do accept the principle axiom: "As Above so Below," which means of course, that if the birth process exist here on earth with a set of two parents, one male one female, it must follow that we also have divine cosmic parents, one Father, one Mother; one Masculine Principle, one Feminine Principle.
In scripture, Jesus is made to tell us, that God exist because we exist (paraphrased Jn 14: 9). This is the only, one, known proof, of God's existence: We exist! Therefore God must exist --- simple! According to the very same gospel version, Jesus himself defined God as Spirit (Jn 4:24). Yet the Johannite document would have us believe that God is both Jesus and Spirit. Compared to John 14, it is a contradiction of terms. Truth is being compromised. Granted Jesus' soul became pure spirit after his death; and like all humanity, his physical frame contained the spirit of God while incarnate. Yet as he lived and breathed, he told us that God was Spirit. Unless we understand both Johannite statements in metaphysical terms, Christianity which is largely based upon John's gospel has just defined Jesus as that God. It has misconstrued Jesus' reply to Philip and rendered 'his' universal statement as: "Philip, If you see me, you already see God," instead of: Philip, he who sees another human being already sees God, for God is the Spirit within.
Howbeit, God is both Spirit and Jesus?, and howbeit Jesus is the only man to claim this divine birthright? Or did he? Who and what do we believe?, a hyperbole or the truth. Do we believe John or Jesus? To summarize; in existentialist terms: were there not God, then man would invent one; --- as indeed they have.
ORNAMENTS OF THE UNIVERSE
In Tibetan scripture, when a certain elderly woman, who had attempted to approach closer to hear Jesus, was rudely pushed aside by one of the men in attendance, Jesus reprimanded him severely saying:
09. "It is not meet that a son should push aside his mother to occupy the first place which should be hers. Whosoever respecteth not his mother, the most sacred being next to God, is unworthy the name of son."
10. "Listen, therefore, to what I am about to say: "Respect women, for she is the mother of the universe and all the truth of divine creation dwells within her."
11. "She is the basis of all that is good and beautiful, as she is also the germ of life and death. On her depends the entire existence of man, for she is his moral and natural support in all his works."
16. "The wife and the mother, inestimable treasures bestowed on you by God; they are the most beautiful ornaments of the universe, and from them shall be born all that shall inhabit the world."
"The Unknown Life of Jesus Christ,"
by Nicholas Notovich, pages 136-138.
Religions do not thrive and are not formed because they are necessarily based upon the truth, but because people believe in them. This we have termed faith; yet faith need not be blind to truth. Our Christian faith is founded upon premises, when studied, become very shaky. Philosophical Christianity and the theology of the Church is a whole discourse on logical thinking; largely based upon the Greek stoical and/or platonic ideals. But for all we know the basic premise may be false. That premise is the idea that only Jesus is God. It is a false premise because Jesus himself has called God, Father. And who else stands paramount to the Father but the Mother. It is not the son.
A Change Of Arena
My Right To Question was written, not as an apologetic to my Christian faith, and certainly, not in defiance of it. Rather, it was written as an alternate view. My Right To Question goes beyond Church dogma. Its roots hit closer to home. When I first started writing this essay my original purpose was to put the Mother figure back into the creation story. That purpose has not changed. My focus has. Although I found Her in eastern religions, the Kabballah, and Egyptian and Greek mythologies just to name a few, I could not find Her in my own Christian faith---biblically speaking, that is.
To Those Who Do Not Question
When I was a child I thought in childish ways; as I have grown, I have learned to give up childhood fantasies. As I see it, my argument is no longer with the Church per say, but with an ideal. More recently, I have come to realize that it is with other laity, especially. This I have learnt through the years, through advocating psychic phenomena and finally through the processes of researching and gathering materials.Still I question and I have grown beyond years. I have questioned the difference between Jesus and Christ, man and his God; Messiah-ship versus kingship; Baptism and sin; good and evil; truth and Truth; death and rebirth; resurrection and resuscitation; miracle and science; philosophy and metaphysics. I have questioned the role of women and the importance of Mary and Mary Magdalen; until finally, I have questioned the validity of the gospels themselves. Something I never did as a child. And in all these questions I was forever brought back to one key figure, Jesus. There was no getting around this---no way to address the Mother directly ---no way to avoid the issue---Jesus is God. That and that alone is the heart of Christianity.
It is also basis for putting forth a 20th century argument. Howbeit a man be God and his mother not? How in heaven's name did this entire process begin? Are we not all made equal? My Right To Question, questions all those, who will not, question. Ultimately, my inner question has always been this. By what right, by what measure did man come to make man God? Howbeit the son is higher than the father?
Upon this rock was the church built. Remove that stone and the entire edifice will crumble---or so I believed. Modern technology has taught differently; remove one stone and replace it with another. The building will not fall if its supports are held in place. Besides, there is always an alternative view. Don't remove that stone, but simple place another beside it; thus making the entire structure sound and indestructible. Place the Mother along side the Father; and have son and daughter stand erect nearby. All four pillars would represent the family unit, each in his own way. The house will be a home and no longer a mere building, an assemblage. We will give it new purpose, a grand design.