Teaching 1: Sources of Theology
Teaching 2: Divisions in Theology
Teaching 3: Existence of Theology
Teaching 4: Bases and Method
Teaching 5: Postulates
Properties of Theology
Teaching 7: Aryan Concept about Creation
Teaching 8: Evolution of Dogma
Teaching 9: Theology of the Existence
Teaching 10: Vedanta
Teaching 11: Theology of the Non-Existence
Teaching 12: The Eightfold Path
Teaching 13: Theology of Creation
Teaching 14: The Concept about Trinity
Teaching 15: Theology of the Divine Incarnation
Teaching 16: The Divine Incarnation
Teaching 1: Sources of Theology
Generally, in relation to Theology, people think at once about church or religion, and more often than not you hear commentaries that, as the obvious result of ignorance, surround this word or its meaning with certain remote and dark halo, as if it was detached from human life, and an exclusive redoubt of a group of beings –“theologians”– whose activities appear before men as something almost incomprehensible.
So, certainly, we should try to cast light on this complicate matter as long as we consider it in depth, a matter that practically all present beings are dealing with now.
And before other considerations, we should remember that theology, a word derived from the Greek, and at a time from “theologian”, is two words in one that mean respectively “God” and “exposition”, “saying”.
When our thought goes back to Sources of Humanity, on certain phase of the life in our planet we find that, wave by wave, more currents of life come down to this planet. These lives, predestined to give rise to the terrestrial evolution of something, are a part of the active God’s manifestation, called Human Monads.
These entities, launched to such an extraordinary mission, obviously acted in the exact limits fixed by the Law of God, the Manifestation.
Devoid of physical, terrestrial forms, necessarily their yearning, their first need, was to fulfill the inexorable need of adaptation to that environment where they had to act and live. A gross example of this situation would be that of a Son of Cafh who went to a foreign and strange country. His first need would be adaptation to climate, ground, food, abode, a new and unknown language, folkways, habits and practices of men in this new surrounding. This man will be a stranger in those lands, but he will keep alive the injunction driving him there and also his instructor’s injunction. His source will be patent and clear in his mind, heart and soul, and over and above his feelings of being an exile, the knowledge of his indestructible union with the thought and life of all those things that he had to forsake, will shine with ineffable comforting light.
Something like that also occurs with those early human monads. Driven to mission assigned by divine predestination, they set out to build human physical forms on Earth, but keep an intact memory of their divine origin, and still they remain reluctant to join those gross forms that, as they foresee, someday will darken the clear consciousness of their true state.
But the time goes by, the Divine Law is inexorably in force over the monad, and as long as physical forms improve, the bond uniting entities and their work becomes more and more steady. The spirit descends and enters entirely the body; the adaptation has finished. Since this moment, the monad becomes Humanity, –Humanity growing and perfecting more and more the necessary physical instrument to fulfill their mission.
What happened during all this time regarding the divine Humanity consciousness, if we can make use of the word “consciousness”?
No doubt, whereas the clear vision of the initial state grew darker and darker in the monad, Humanity went on to live, even in developing an instinctive mind, entirely in agreement with the divine natural law. And also one has to admit that, by doing it, Humanity lived a full Natural Union with God, –a thing that man has lost when he started to develop his present rational mind.
Throughout this long period of time, Humanity could usufruct an early clear vision, so to speak at least with not too much proper words, and although that vision grew dark and dark, men achieved such a union through astral vision even in the times of the Atlantean.
But deep changes had to occur with the emergence of the Aryan Race.
We are told that until then Humanity lived naturally united with God. The development of the rational mind and, as its outcome, of the conscious freewill, destroys the balance, and the harmonization with the Divine Law, the vision and union and the natural and also the direct communication with God come to an end.
The man loses definitively his astral vision and will depend entirely on his senses to know and to get into touch with others, and the latter not only are unable to reveal him God, but even they intervene as an extraordinary rampart between man and Humanity.
So the Aryan man should pay a price for his conquest. His eyes will be blind, his ears deaf, and truly, that one who wishes to recover again the Divine vision, must disconnect and blind his senses through renunciation.
But, of course, this method –renunciation– is uncommon and can be taken as a method of general application for present Humanity. And also we should admit that, whereas this method is known and practiced since millennia from now, it is unlikely that Humanity has known and practiced it since the moment when their troubles began.
On the other hand, the natural substantial union survived indelibly and safely since the descent on monads into Earth, and this inner knowledge, this intimate feeling could not and never can be suffocated by the mind.
On the contrary, that inner intimate certainty about God existing in all men constitutes an element of powerful mind-reason activity, which precisely has caused man to ask a series of transcendental questions.
Man intuits God, but senses contribute nothing concrete to reveal Him.
And the mind wanders alone and goes astray on the rational field, being unable to cast light by itself on the great mystery.
Humanity would remain lost if the Divine Providence had not acted as early as in the beginning of the race by foreseeing future events.
God reveals Himself to men through Great Solar Initiates. The Teachings that these Initiates receive –true Divine Revelation– condense in the Great Fundamental Traditions. First, their transmission is oral. Later, other Initiates gather, consolidate and finally give them by writing.
So, the Divine Message comes, given when the Root Race appears in the form of Orthodox Writings of Great Fundamental Traditions. And the true and unique Revelations become the foundation and beginning in any attempt of divine knowledge.
So, Revelations represent that which in Mathematics are fundamental postulates.
They are truths that cannot be humanly demonstrable. They are the word that God, by discovering Himself according to His Own terms, offers as a mental support so that Humanity can know Him until those limits traced by the Revelation itself.
.If one bears in mind precedent sayings about the meaning of the word “Theologian” and, as the result of it, “Theology”, then we can entirely understand the purpose, object, source and finality of Theology.
So, one can state that the source of Theology goes back and begins in Orthodox Writings of Great Fundamental Traditions.
Also, that its purpose and object is to unveil to man the Divine Wisdom underlying revealed texts, and that its finality is to sanctify and dignify the man.
.So, Theology is the one and whole wisdom that God makes emerge in a man through intuition, so that he can develop it rationally and achieve full divine knowledge.
So, its method is mainly rational, deductive and inductive, and essentially based on revealed texts: one fixed point –the word of God–¬ in the turbulent lake of one’s mind.
Ultimately, Theology grows characteristically through its reasoned, coordinated and interconnected discourse, and always on the infuse light of Divine Wisdom transmitted through Revelations.
So, in short, Theology is a form and characteristic mode of the Aryan Race, which needs to make use of reason because they have lost chances of the Atlantean and of even of the older Humanity to remain connected with God.
And as one’s reason is unable by itself to make know the Divine, it must rest on and start from an intuitive feeling of God –which exists in every being– and of Divine Revelations.
So, the man, the student can progress on the path and acquire humanly divine knowledge that, united with an intimate experience obtained through higher intuition, can achieve a high grade of knowledge.
.But one’s mind is limited. So, the last verities that a man can obtain will be received only through ecstasy or Divine Union.
Teaching 2: Divisions in Theology
Theology, as a science that is mainly rational, tries to know God.
The man has two chances to achieve this attempt.
His first chance consists in thinking of God and knowing Him exclusive by reason.
His second chance consists in recognizing that his reason is limited and in including elements that are out of the circle of reason, by talking them as basis and starting point.
The so-called Natural Theology represents the first position, whereas Dogmatic Theology and its derived branches represent the second one.
So Natural Theology deals with God and His attributes and perfections independently of any other helps, that is, it tries to reach the Highest Being through reason.
Its primordial object is God as Absolute Being and Creator.
Also it is called Theodicy, qualified by Aristotle as early philosophy. It constitutes the so-called Fundamental Theology, in the whole Theology field.
Whereas faith is not included in its original elements, it is able to consider it, and eventually demonstrates that faith becomes a possibility.
Dogmatic Theology. It deals with God and His attributes and perfections of the light of Revealed Verities. So it rests on dogmas of faith, on revealed principles, in order to explore them rationally and get new Verities, which churches can convert or not into articles of faith.
Matters of study in Dogmatic Theology are, for instance, the following: God in Se; God Creator; God Redeemer; God Sanctifier.
Certain branches are derived from Dogmatic Theology; they must particularly mentioned by virtue of their importance and own life.
Moral Theology. It deals with principles of Dogmatic Theology –an also of Natural Theology– applied to human actions. So refers to man, with intelligence and freewill, and to his consequent way of acting.
Its fundamental postulate is freedom.
It deals particularly with human actions and operations; generally, with passions, habits and virtues; with sins and vices; and with grace and merit. In developing these matters, it considers the law in force for human actions, justice and charity.
Ascetic Theology and Mystical Theology belong to the main spiritual aspect of theology.
Ascetic Theology is a part of Dogmatic and Moral Theology referred to exercising virtues, in other words, what to practice (virtues) and what to lay aside (sins).
Moral Theology is a part of Dogmatic and Moral Theology referred to perfecting one’s life in our more intimate relationships of the human intelligence with God, in active life and in contemplative life as well.
Methodologically speaking, also there are two positions: Scholastic Theology and Positive Theology.
Scholastic Theology is the so-called dogmatics that, from Revealed Verities, gets its conclusions by means of principles and methods of Scholastic Philosophy. Or in more general words, it considers elements given by Revelation by giving them philosophical structure.
Positive Theology is the so-called dogmatics resting on and demonstrating mainly its conclusions with principles, facts and movements of the Revelation.
Teaching 3: Existence of Theology
The human thought adopts many forms and aspects, even in the transcendental field. But all they contain similar forms and rules; for instance, if theology is a necessary and really existing science.
You can take this issue by adopting one postulate –a fundamental concept of a postulate– in order to grasp the form of theological thought.
For instance, say with Thomas Aquinas that the “necessary being” includes the existence in his own concept. Thence obviously every necessary being exists.
If one demonstrates that theology is necessary, we would demonstrate that it does exist, and is a real and existing science.
As you know, theology is knowledge of God; it is a cognitive habit not only current but also usual to consider God.
But the consideration of God contains two forms or sciences applied: Natural Theology, or Theodicy, which starts from philosophy, and the so-called Holy Theology, which is above and beyond human philosophy.
Natural Theology, or Theodicy, considers God only through natural faculties of human reason. On the other hand, Holy Theology considers God by a supernatural, divine means, –through Divine Revelation. Holy Theology considers God through His own manifestation to men, that is, through the Revelation, not through His formal visible manifestation.
But knowledge through Revelation does not belong exclusively to theology. A knowledge through habitual infuse faith also comes from Revelation. But this faith is simple acceptance of a truth revealed by God. Theology takes for granted something more: human effort, reasoning and discourse.
So you have to differentiate two groups in the field of the Divine Revelation: formal verities explicitly revealed, and virtual verities implicitly revealed. Those verities are objects of faith. Faith alone is nor enough for virtual verities implicitly revealed; one needs a natural rational discourse to expose how a formal revealed verity contains these verities. That is why we are told that Theology, which needs reason, is divine-human knowledge of divine things. In other words, it is an intellectual habit dealing with virtual verities implicitly revealed.
Now we can ask this question: really is there a theological science? First we should explain if a theological science is necessary.
When Thomas Aquinas approaches this problem, first he calls the attention on the existence of two aspects, of two types of verities.
Certain verities are objectively and intrinsically supernatural, and are beyond natural intellectual forces (Faith).
Other verities intrinsically and formally natural; so they are proportional to human mental capacity, and God has revealed them to human intelligence –call it grace– to help and guide him.
Then here is a twofold question: should the man know through divine revelation those supernatural and divine verities that are beyond his natural intellective capacity? Should the other type of verities, which are not beyond his intellectual capacity, be revealed to man?
When one analyzes the first question, we notice at once that the man does not need at all to know through supernatural revelation, because otherwise revelations would stop being supernatural.
Therefore, one should admit only a hypothetical need that would respond being conditioned by the final object that the man must achieve, that is, his perfection and liberation.
God has given graciously the revelation to man, since revelation would be beyond his capacity, and he would be unable to reach it by himself.
So the supernatural revelation responds to a divine purpose for man, to a gracious gift received by man to fulfil the divine plan on Earth, which ultimately implies a clear and perfect possession lof God, his return to the Divine from which he has emerged.
So, to achieve it, the man has to concentrate all his forces and acts in God; but this is impossible if he does not know the destination and way leading him to God, and as much the destination as the way are intrinsically supernatural.
So, of course, only the supernatural revelation can lead the man to his glorious destination, and then he should agree that, if he can and must reach his own liberation and bliss –an hypothetical proposition– also he needs absolutely to know the supernatural truth, since this truth alone can give him the revelation (it is an absolute, all-embracing need).
As we said, there is another group of verities, which the man can actually achieve by himself through the intellect. So his revelation cannot constitute an absolute need to man.
But, no doubt, so that men can achieve their divine early fixed plan, they all need congenitally and certainly these verities, as soon as reason is able to discriminate between good and evil.
Even reason tells this is practically impossible, as very few men can achieve knowledge through their own efforts, in the quake of their mental deficiencies, or because they are absorbed in mere material tasks, or for lack of incentive or for laziness.
Moreover, man achieves knowledge after long, long time. You know how hard it is to be able to know material things around. The harder is this task, more time it requires to deepen those verities, which in the quake of their depth and abstraction demand devotion and ability that some few people have.
Finally, any exposition of the truth would demand complete unity. It is a mental habit in man to express everything through his subjective exposition; so his possible error is enormous, and you would find opinions in absolute disagreement.
Then, man needs to know morally, although not absolutely, in a clear and safe way, as soon as his rational capacity emerges, that God, the only Master of the truth, reveals him those divine verities that he can achieve by himself through his own efforts, and that mainly constitute verities of moral and religious type.
Openly this reasoning contains the need of faith, which is not theology, but you will see it also implies the need of theology.
In fact, faith involves two elements: an objective element, what you believe, the revealed truth; and another subjective element, namely, one’s mind admitting expressions of faith.
The habit of faith cannot grasp the object of faith if you do not propose this object to human intelligence before. Therefore, the object demands two things: a truth openly revealed, and its proposition to human reason.
But an explicit truth contains many other implicit truths, and they are exactly the object of Theology, which fetches them from an explicit formal truth, and unveils them to human intellect.
This labor is not that of faith, it is Theology; so a believer that accepts by simple faith an explicit revealed truth turns steady and strong his faith, in the quake of reasons given to him in order to prove the credibility of divine mysteries. This task is essentially theological, and constitutes its true object.
Moreover, faith proposes even the deepest mysteries to a rational entity willing to understand by means of his own reason. So, he thinks up and analyzes, compares diverse parts of the revelation, and deduces new verities. Doubt drives him to deepen that which his faith proposes, and even he must strive for seeking arguments against those who attack his faith.
All this emerges from faith and constitutes typical theology functions.
From a meeting of faith and reason, Theology emerges spontaneously as a true human need, and we can say properly again with Thomas Aquinas that a lack of Theology means or absence of faith or absence of reason.
So there is in man a need of Theology; Theology is fundamentally necessary. So, there is a reasoned study of faith, a divine-human research of the Divine Revelation, which is precisely Theology.
Teaching 4: Bases and Method
As Theology is an essentially rational activity, and also a science par excellence, it must have bases as starting points and supports, and characteristic methods in agreement with its objectives.
At this point you have seen that, ultimately, the objective of Theology is to know the truth, or also in other words, to know God; so human reason cannot speculate any longer, and must hold and base on the only thing that God permits him to understand as a more or less intelligible manifestation: the Revelation.
In fact, man can glimpse his longed-for final truth only through Revelation.
Revelation is his only contacting-connecting point –although dark and general– to use and enter the great mystery of himself and God.
Traditions of the past, and even those of our days, tell that God sometimes reveals Himself to some chosen souls by teaching and enlightening them by means of extraordinary knowledge. These revelations, however, cannot serve humanity as a whole, since as they are imparted to certain being, generally fulfill particular objectives of an individual soul and tend to a specific mission that this being fulfils in his own life.
So, Revelation as a theological basis must contain certain general conditions that are over and above an individual being, by comprising Humanity as a whole not only for one generation, but also for the entire period of human evolution in agreement with a characteristic mode.
So, in Revelation you find in one of its fundamental characteristics: its antiquity. Or in other words, the source of Revelation vanishes in the past of Humanity.
But also, as Revelation must be in force for the entire period of human evolution according to a characteristic mode or finality –which here is conquest and development of the rational mind– of course Revelation, as basis of any rational development to achieve the Final Truth, must arise from the dawn of the Root Race.
So, theologically speaking, Revelation implies Great Fundamental Traditions of Humanity, and its source vanishes in the past to such an extent that it would be useless to place it chronologically, or to determine its author, who obviously belongs to an earlier stage than the present one.
In fact, as Revelation may practically be called the ruling development law of the Race, necessarily it will be previous to its clear emergence, which means that the individual being that has fixed it belongs to an evolutionary stage differing from that which later developed under this law, and therefore is beyond any possible determination.
So, obviously just a Solar Initiate can have launched through the Idea Mother that which we call Fundamental Traditions whose source is truly divine as this Solar Initiate is a simple channel for the word of God. By the way, this clarifies and gives validity to the statement that Revelation is the only basis to enter the Final Truth tentatively.
Finally, Revelation must be by writing so that it can be held as such. This written condition implies an affirmation concept. This means that the original Revelation, orally transmitted from generation to generation in the beginning, later was transmitted by writing by other initiates, who by doing so, confirm its own Verities on the light of his experiences gathered, corroborated and confirmed throughout the times.
So, Revelation as such must ever have an oral stage, and later another written stage, and behind this form it passes to posterity.
This way, Revelation becomes an Orthodox Scripture by means of its uninterrupted written affirmation since times beyond any possible determination; so Revelation can be defined as Orthodox Scriptures of Great Fundamental Traditions.
From these sayings, the following qualities of the Revelation emerge with clarity:
Perpetuity: Revelation is perpetual. As one speaks humanly about perpetuity, we must take this concept in its human dimension, and not in relation to the Absoluteness held as eternal.
As one sees it in this way, you understand as humanly perpetual all those things with real validity and duration in a complete cycle of human development. The Truth and Teaching of Revelation is valid in the whole existence of the Root Race, because is constituted by the Idea Mother. So it is humanly perpetual.
Infallibility: Revelation is infallible because the Idea Mother is a true Law of Cyclic Race Predestination that is dependent on the Great Law of Universal Predestination, which, although is unknown and unknowable to man, one intuits it divinely governing the manifestation.
The Only Exponent of the Doctrine: because Revelation guides and signals means that Humanity can use to complete their Law of Chances in its racial cycle and in the circle of their predestination.
So, Revelation contained in the Orthodox Scriptures is the spring of all human knowledge; therefore, it is basis and starting point of any efforts to come into and conquer the Divine Wisdom by means of Theology.
Teaching 5: Postulates
The fundamental Theology postulates based on concepts of the Revelation, on which it builds its magnificent rational structure, are as follows:
Theology is the Only Truth.
Theology is a Divine Knowledge taught directly by God.
The object of Theology is to discover to man the Divine Knowledge and its relationship with God.
Theology is the Only Truth because contains all, whole knowledge –rational and intuitive.
Rational knowledge because any idea and knowledge rightly interconnected ever leads to only one invariable conclusion, to certain knowledge ever responding to and emanated from a simple, unique, and therefore divine, fundamental law.
Intuitive knowledge because just by means of intuition, illuminated by the infuse Revelation light, man can coordinate and synthesize all his own ideas in one Unique, simple and divine Idea.
Theology is a Divine Knowledge because is a true message of God, addressed to the intuition of man by means of the Revelation, so that he acquires rationally knowledge about God such as He is, as an active principle of the Knowable Universe, but not behind His Undifferentiated and Unknowable aspect.
Finally, the first postulate states the final objective of Theology, that is, to unveil to man the Divine Knowledge in a systematic and real form, and not in accidental and veiled form. Through his efforts and labor to focus his thoughts on revealed principles, man will succeed in sanctifying and dignifying his life and, eventually, in getting the Beatific Vision through Ecstasy.
Theology is essentially the way of knowledge through efforts and reason applied and assisted by intuition that, as we said, is illuminated by the infuse Revelation light.
Therefore, at present, the individual being who follows this path, the student of Theology, must apply to all sources of knowledge at his disposal.
First he must apply to studying diverse philosophical systems, by knowing and practicing derivative sciences, even phenomenal aspects of Nature; and he will analyze and synthesize his own conclusions by considering all available mental forms and means, through a reasoning perfectly interconnected. So he will gradually draw veils of ignorance.
So, always along with a clear, ordered and constant mental activity and a method of living with purity and prayer, later an infuse light will clarify his intuition and he will start humanly understanding Verities Revealed by God.
He achieves a true fusion between his rational mind and his intuitive mind.
Even there are beings that go beyond this stage and get certain higher knowledge through ecstasy; they understand Divine Verities not revealed, even though just potentially. This knowledge is called Theologia in Deo Clare Visa, whereas knowledge acquired by rational study in the wake of intuition is called Theologia in Via, which is commonly within the rage of men.
Ecstatic knowledge is of few persons, of Great Initiates, and of some disciples, –beings who later pour their knowledge on the so-called Dogmas.
So, a Dogma is a deduced truth, achieved Clara Visa Deo, that is, ecstatically in front of God.
Generally speaking, Great Initiates are those who establish a Dogma, which later, a disciple spreads and explains, and eventually reaches the people through Priesthood.
Generally and synthetically, a Dogma is an indisputable conceptual sentence but, through its established doctrine it states a Revealed Truth and opens the way making possible to deduce other potentially implied knowledge and verities.
So, theological verities and knowledge gradually emerge through certain right discursive reasoning.
We are told theology is an essentially rational activity of man, characteristic in the Aryan man, who only can use by himself reason as a constructive instrument of knowledge.
But of course, once again, his efforts would be fruitless without Divine Revelation, without the Infuse Light of God illuminating his intuition.
Teaching 6: Properties of Theology
.To know certain thing, object or discipline, always you start by knowing its qualities or properties.
So, see which those properties of Theology are.
These properties are essentially of two aspects: absolute, exclusive, and fit to theology itself; and relative, complementing it and especially fit to human sciences in general.
Now you will see which properties are fit to the first group.
Theology is rigorous science.
Necessarily, so that certain discipline becomes science its conclusions should be perfectly concordant and contained in its principles. But it is impossible to get the evidence of conclusions if you do not have the evidence of principles.
So, how can you get the evidence of conclusions, if theological principles are based upon faith on a revealed truth that is not an evident principle?
In order to overcome this pitfall, Thomas Aquinas offered a remarkable subtlety. He introduced the concept of subordinated science and subordinating science.
Theology is not an ordinary science: it is science subordinated to the divine science. So, Theology is based upon principles of an obviously higher science –divine science–, and in this way, by depending on it, its principles do not need to be evident in its own science, since they are so in another higher science.
So, Theology is a science subordinated to the divine science because its principles get evidence in the Science of God.
But in man, Theology remains detached from its subordinating science, because you get its principles just through articles of faith, through Revelation. But for the time being this substitutes the clear vision of God, which a man can achieve through beatific vision. When a man reaches it, he will get the evidence of principles now possessed only by faith, which he will not need to get the clear vision.
So, Theology is a science based on evident divine principles, which for the time being and till the time of a higher enlightenment are accepted through faith. So, formally speaking, Theology gives only the evidence of a conclusion, but not of the concluded thing.
Theological conclusion is the name of a conclusion deduced from a principle or divinely revealed truth.
A deduction can be made from two revealed premises, or from a revealed premise and another premise certainly known through true natural reason. Cannot there be a theological conclusion if no premise has been revealed.
Now, as there are explicit revealed verities and other implicit revealed verities, you can infer that there is a whole spectrum of chances of achieving a true theological conclusion, but you ever need a formal or virtually revealed premise.
As you can assume, on the long way traveled through by the theological science, this science has received many tendencies and influences. So, you can find those who have gone from the revealed to the non-revealed thing. This way they have tried and even succeeded in taking Theology away from its true field, that of the Divine Revelation.
That is why the true Theology must be limited and limits itself from the explicitly revealed thing till the implicitly revealed thing. This way, the true Theology keeps on subject to the revealed truth, to the divine science, of which it is subordinated science.
Unity of the Theological Science
Another property of Theology is its fundamental unity. If Theology thinks about the most varied subjects and aspects, it is essentially one because of its objective formal motive, which is virtual revelation. We have seen how the purpose of Theology is the discovery, the virtual conclusion, implied by the revealed truth.
Virtual Revelation is essentially one and the same in the whole Theology because it comes from a formal, unique and essential truth.
Thence its indivisible unity impeding its division into other various sciences.
A revealed truth is always the main cause of every theological conclusion, and when a human rational premise intervenes, first it is always analyzed and judged on the light of the revealed truth, becoming then an auxiliary, an instrument of the revealed premise.
This way unity is preserved and explained.
Theology is both speculative and practical at the same time
Another property of Theology is simultaneous practicality and speculation.
But not always it has been though in this way.
Some times, the Catholic Theology particularly tended to practicality, to the extent of being divided into three parts:
About things to enjoy: one and trine God.
About those things to use: all created things, sacraments and virtues.
About persons whose use created goods and will enjoy eternal goods: angels and men.
Its bearings are quite practical, and its object to achieve the Highest Good, which is God.
But later, the Catholic Theology experienced a great turn under Tomas Aquinas’ influence, who guided it more and more backward, to its early speculative field, but preserving the practical aspect.
Till our days, it has preserved this character, and the Catholic Theology in agreement with purpose and finality of Theology.
But naturally, one has to admit that a purely speculative truth deduced, radiates its own light over the whole field of being, and in this way is practically applied with its clear concepts and teachings of love and understanding.
Theology is the Highest Wisdom
.We are told Theology is the Highest or Absolute Wisdom because is double knowledge about things: through first and universal principles of reason (logical order), and through first efficient cause, example and end of all, which is God.
This Absolute Wisdom is: A quite universal science because it comprises all those things that reason is unable to do.
It is a quite true science because demonstrates its own conclusions by means of obvious principles of reason and by means of first and second causes of ontological kind, that is, divine (metaphysical) kind.
Finally, it is the highest science that demonstrates by means of the highest causes, by means of the reality and even of knowledge.
So, a wisdom and the highest science, Theology: judges all other sciences; arranges all of them for its own purpose, and uses all lower sciences for its own benefit and advantage.
Theology is science that demonstrates through authority
Theology is a science that, through rigorous demonstration, deduces conclusions from explicitly and formally revealed verities. So, Theology is rigorously demonstrative in regard to its own conclusions, and as these conclusions rest on verities of faith, which have been revealed by God, you may come to the conclusion that Theology is able to demonstrate through authority.
But how will act a theologian in front of a rival who does not admit the revealed truth?
As verities of faith are infallible because are divine ones, cannot there be a real opposition between them and human science.
Therefore, a theologian must solve opposite arguments because all of them are forcibly solvable.
Of course, when he attempts it, you cannot always be sure of their right or real solution.
If the argument is formally wrong, its solution is ever possible. The big issue is when the argument is defective as for doctrine, because a sure solution implies evident knowledge, evidence of the divine mystery, which is unknown.
In these events, nobody has the evidence about the mystery, and a theologian can reply the argument “necessarily” does not demonstrate the impossibility of the mystery, and this does not admit a reply because one never can demonstrate that the mystery under discussion is necessarily impossible.
Teaching 7: Aryan Concept about Creation
As long as the Aryan man would emerge, Humanity was losing “clare visa” knowledge of God, which was the heritage of the Atlantean race.
Thanks to typical characteristics of their race, Atlantean men had direct vision of God and, therefore, the concept about Absolute Unity of God.
But as long as the rational mind is being born, which is a characteristic and achievement of the Aryan race, this mind grows dark till psychic faculties of the precedent race are totally lost.
Aryans lost their direct vision of God, and being immersed in a phenomenal world and totally dependent on their physical senses, on early stages of their evolution, they deified and personified only forces of Nature, by deifying and personifying them to such an extent that they became true gods and men.
But the concept about Divine Unity never disappeared entirely as an underlying memory in the soul, to such an extent that the concept about the Supreme God, higher than all gods and remote reminiscence of past knowledge, can be invariably found in the variegated world of Aryan deities.
This fundamental concept could not die. Being surely sustained by Great Initiates in charge of such a task, it was necessary to wait for a timely moment for its eventual emergence with full power.
Naturally, this could not happen till the new achievement, that is, reason sufficiently developed to attempt, through it, a re-discovery of Verities preserved in traditions connected with the Revelation.
This re-finding of the concept about Divine Unity, about the Absolute One, or as It is usually called, could not necessarily be an instantaneous act.
Years, decades, perhaps centuries were necessary for Great Initiates, sages and masters of the antiquity to find the mind, the new rational mind, in order to reach, step by step, to deduce logically and rationally the thought about the Non-manifest One, the Eternal One.
As we said, Great Initiates and later, their disciples, are those who, in stating the Revelation, are discovering implicitly deduced Verities that, after being rightly developed, later become condensed in dogmas.
A return to the concept about Divine Unity constitutes, beyond any doubts, a true theological deduction, rightly interconnected and perfectly reasoned.
This task became so fundamental, and its concepts and dogmas pass down by masters of the antiquity became so clear, that they still exist till our days, in spite of certain darkness and transient shadows produced by philosophies and religions that later have proliferated and will proliferate.
Immersed in the phenomenal world, where multiplicity hides and veils the One, no doubt those instructors had to start to reason from a perceivable manifestation in Nature and Universe.
As even nowadays, they noticed a constant change in the whole phenomenal world, in all manifested things that can be seen, touched, tasted, smelled and heard.
Nothing is constant, permanent, fixed, imperishable in the phenomenal world.
A logical deduction arises from this remark: nothing is perdurable and permanent in the phenomenal world, and all things observed are just a series of successive and mutable forms and events.
As nothing is constant and permanent, one can deduce that all observed things have no true real existence; their existence is fleeting and transient.
So, one deduces through logical reasoning that the perceivable manifestation, the phenomenal Universe, is not real in absolute sense.
So, here is the time for the great query.
If the phenomenal world is not real, absolute, is there something else that we do not perceive and underlies hidden behind veils?
So, did Great Initiates, custodians and divulgers of the Truth declare and upheld that Something real and substantial exists behind the veil of the phenomenal world, because, according to their reasoning, even though those things perceived are an illusion, a mere appearance, where could this illusion, this appearance rest, which would be the cause of this illusion?
Appearance cannot exist by itself. Therefore, one can deduce the eventual existence of something real and substantial.
“Real” in absolute and substantial sense, since it means real or existing nature or essence: What contains inherently all properties and qualities.
So, one comes to the conclusion that the whole phenomenal world rest, so to speak, on something universal, on a Substance or Essence, real in absolute sense, which necessarily is the Only Reality.
Here a question arises: is this Substance simple or compound, One or Multiple.
One’s reason deduces that this Substance is One in its Essence, based –as contemporary experimental science rigorously does– on the observation of the phenomenal world, where one can check certain rigorous serial and ordered facts, to such an extent that any observable phenomenon is a consequence of another precedent phenomenon and the cause of the subsequent one. So, one comes to the so-called First Cause or, as we said, to the rational concept that the Substance is One in its essence.
But the only reality is beyond the rational power of man. One cannot understand or imagine its nature and essence. It is not possible to apply it attributes, qualities and definitions of the world, of the phenomenal universe, because it transcends them.
So, it is Unknowable to man; Indefinable and Ineffable, that is to say, you cannot define or explain with words.
That is why, for lack of a better possibility, in this aspect they have called God “It”, “Absolute”, “Non-manifest”.
Here we need to introduce, or rather, to recall, another fundamental postulate set up by Great Initiates, which remains intact till our days, to such an extent that constitutes a fundamental law in experimental sciences.
It is the law of energy preservation, and even matter preservation, which being formulated for this purpose says: something cannot arise from the nothing, and something cannot disappear in the nothing.
If one applies this postulate and analyzes the one Reality, we can deduce, first rationally, that It has been always, because It cannot arise from the nothing, and second, that is eternal, because something cannot be annihilated and become the nothing.
In other words, It has been, is and will be always: it is Eternal.
But God –It– also is Infinite, because one cannot imagine except Him, nothing defining, limiting, circumscribing, affecting, influencing or causing Him. He contains everything in Himself.
So, It is the only cause of the phenomenal Universe, because there is no other cause, except Him.
It is Cause with no cause, the real Cause, the only real cause, because there is not any real and absolute cause, except Him.
So, in fact, as we said, cause and effect do not exist in the phenomenal world but simply you find in it chain effects, a continuous and ordered development of events responding all of them to the only real Cause, that s, It.
In relative sense, you observe in the world phenomena as if they responded to a cause and left an effect behind. And you can observe how this process is carried out in accordance with laws ordering and ruling phenomena, regularly and continuously.
Through reasoning, you understand that this harmonious game responds to a fundamental Cause, which precisely is the only real Cause, that is, It.
Continuing our reasoning, you can deduce that God –It– also is Immutable and Indivisible.
“Immutable” because, as He is the only Cause, nothing can change Him, and even cannot there be anything able to become changed or transmuted, because as He is the whole existence, nothing existing could make it. Also, it cannot become another Reality, because He is the Only Reality, and cannot stop being, because something cannot vanish and become the nothing.
He is Invisible, because nothing can divide Him; and even if you imagined this possibility, as the result of it would be two or further Realities instead of one, and this concept is against reason, because it would destroy the infinite nature of It, and a co-existence of two infinites cannot be possible.
Finally, everything that truly IS has to be real.
God is the only Reality and, therefore, He is all that Is, and no other thing can be that which Is.
Therefore, everything that seemingly is, is not real, is non-existent, is nothing, or is an emanation or manifestation of It.
Here we come to the top point in the theological reasoning about the Creative Divinity.
Can we really say God –It– has created the Universe, the phenomenal world?
Great Initiates gave a rational answer to this question and based it on this fundamental postulate: something cannot arise from the nothing.
Therefore, the idea about “Creation” is out of question in the true sense of the word, because God cannot create the phenomenal Universe from the nothing, since this nothing would mean a state existing “a priori” and different from Him, which is not possible.
Also, God could not “create” something from His own Substance and essence, because His Substance is substance and incompatible with compounds.
Therefore, one must admit that the phenomenal Universe is the result of a process that is beyond the human reason.
God made the Universe from His Nothing, from that which one’s mind cannot understand.
Old masters summed up in three fundamental postulates certain basic aspects used to speculate about relationships between phenomenal Universe and Reality, which are the foundation of this exposition. Those postulates are as follows:
Nothing can arise from the nothing. The nothing cannot be cause or source of something. Nothing real can be created, because if it is not existing now, it can never do. In the event that it never existed, it cannot do now, and if it exists now, it did always.
Something real cannot vanish and become the nothing. If it is existing now, it will ever do. Nothing existing can be annihilated. Dissolution is just a change of forms, –resolution of an effect in its precedent cause, real or relative.
All things that have evolved must have experienced a regression.. A real or relative cause must contain an effect, and an effect must reproduce a real or relative cause.
Teaching 8: Evolution of Dogma
A Dogma is an indisputable Divine Truth that usually should be accepted by faith.
Dogma may be a formal, explicit truth, and also a virtual implicit truth.
The said offered truth, has and expresses certain meaning, and a mission of Theology is precisely to discriminate about this truth, and to make clear, fix and enlarge this meaning so that the light of the Revealed Truth shines more and more radiantly and illuminates more and more the field of the human rational knowledge.
But, as you know quite well, the Revealed Truth and, consequently, dogmas, sometimes are given somehow dimly, and sometimes theologians had to strive for discovering their true sense, if some Great Initiates and his disciples did not earlier.
As the result of this situation of relative confusion in front of the “sense” of dogmas, theological disagreements arose, which even led some people to state that a dogma does not preserve always the same sense, that is, it can vary and even change senses.
According to certain objectors, the dogmatic content, that is, the dogma, is not subject to the invariability of data objectively revealed by God; it particularly responds to alternatives of human psychological and religious factors.
In their opinion, dogmas are as contingent and mutable things as subjective conditions of man admit it.
These subjective conditions evolve and change frequently in man, and there is no homogeneous continuity in changes.
According to this interpretation, dogmas can change substantial contents, to such an extent that dogmatic formulae, as the time passes by, can have entirely diverse, and even opposite senses.
A dogma cannot evolve from one sense to another; this would be transformism. But certainly a homogeneous evolution is possible in one and the same sense.
Evolution is an inherent quality of living and progressive things, and on pain of calling the Revelation something dead and lifeless, one must admit that a dogma evolves and has ever evolved, and the history of dogmas y theology demonstrates it.
First of all and once again, we must make clear that the Revealed Truth is eternal and never will stop being, in order to understand that a dogma can and must evolve. But it is also true that a truth, expressed in certain way, can stop having interest, application and transcendence as a whole at certain time. Life, environment, general circumstances come and go beyond a dogmatic truth expressed in certain way, but this does not mean that the original and unique sense of the Truth stops being valid, and that one must or can seek another different, and even opposite sense in the Truth.
Somehow fairly, philosophers and theologians are reproached because they “live in the past”. Of course, even some people may strive for using certain time-honored sentence, even though it means nothing today.
So, in front of running the risk of remaining behind, a theologian must recall that fundamental verities, revelations and dogmas are perpetual and if sometimes they seem obsolete and out of place, this happens because the contact with the human evolution is lost.
So, a theologian must try and project always on present issues those fundamental verities that, being perpetual and eternal, are also of today.
So, by keeping a close contact with life and human evolution, the fundamental truth, the dogma, takes part in the said evolution in a homogeneous, clear and precise form, preserving inalterably the fundamental sense of the dogma.
Teaching 9: Theology of the Existence
The idea about the Absolute One, the idea about God, is the substratum of whole human mind.
But throughout the ages, and even simultaneously, Humanity considered the Absolute One from diverse points of view.
Even admitting, denying or keeping silent about Him, a position that ultimately is one and the same –since how can one affirm or deny that which human mind is unable to grasp?– men tried to find the Truth and explanation about their existence through themselves, the Universe and phenomenal world.
In front of the phenomenal world, by affirming, denying or rejecting it, thinkers have taken diverse fundamental positions that, ultimately, became characteristic philosophies, theologies and religions.
So, what makes the essential difference among diverse systems –formulated from the antiquity by men, which came to our days by becoming condensed as axiomatic theological concepts– consists of a different interpretation of the Universe and phenomenal world, and their relationship with God.
One of those currents that lasted till our days is that which can be called philosophy and consequent theology of the existence, that is, that of manifestation behind its aspect of permanence.
In fact, according to this conception, the phenomenal Universe is not the result of a unique and absolute force or manifestation: it is the outcome of a dual force.
These two forces act in a parallel and simultaneous way, by inter-flowing constantly one another, and never fuse together.
This play of two aspects, and its constant going back and forth, never achieving the Unity, produces always new aspects that never reach it and appear as infinite and similar new forces, which eventually engrave on the observer the concept of permanence in manifestation, that is, the concept of a phenomenal Universe.
But the fundamental idea about the Unity of God persists always in the mind of man.
So, this axiomatic truth, accepted and affirmed throughout the times, forces a logical and theological deduction: if certain created universe and manifestation exist, then there must be an original point.
At a time, this axiom logically leads to deduce a new truth, which consists in affirming that there us certain fixed and permanent point behind any changing forms.
This deduction is forceful, as you can easily understand it. In fact, since the concept about an absolute unity is an unmovable fundamental axiom, you cannot apply to It the dual character of the phenomenal manifestation appeared as constant movement of two forces never balanced; so, you can think of It just as perfect equilibrium, harmony and lack of dual movement.
In other words, it is a fixed and permanent point underlying every changing phenomenal form.
Inevitably, the corollary of this conception, based on affirming the Absolute One in se and an apparent phenomenal duality, attributes a special character to this theory, since all existing things acquire a fundamental divine character because a permanent point –God– underlies every phenomenon.
Our precedent sayings are a synthesis of fundamental theological concepts in this current of human thought, and permit to glimpse right now its orientation in a practical speculative field.
A search for God will ever go toward knowledge of these aspects or forces, in order to discover, through this full knowledge, the true substratum, the final reality, because in the phenomenal world God underlies all changing forms emerged by the interaction of the so-called two fundamental aspects that, logically, use some vehicle, for instance, vibration of energies to influence each other.
Thence, ultimately and particularly, certain schools remain constantly devoted to examine in depth diverse aspects of the phenomenal Universe, always in search of the Reality behind the phenomenon.
As an outcome of this attitude sometimes produced by disappointment or frustrated efforts, certain schools tend to materialism and atheism as extreme forms deviated from the pure doctrine.
But see how philosophers and theologians think up originally this doctrine.
We said that two forces or active principles interact and produce all phenomena in the Universe, even life, manifested through innumerable forms and varied combinations.
They are: Primordial Substance or energy; all forms and energies, and the spiritual principle come from it.
These two principles are called Prakriti and Purusha in India.
The Spirit wraps up in the substance, and diverse differentiated forms come into being through this process in the phenomenal Universe.
Of course, diverse schools totally disagree about the appearance or manifestation of these two active principles, and even about their characteristics.
So, for instance, certain schools, instead of thinking up the Spiritual Principle as Universal Soul, consider it is an infinite composed by spiritual atoms or individual spirits, which constitute, as a whole, the Unity that is called Spiritual Principle.
According to this pattern, these two principles –Spirit and Substance– instead of being aspects of God –of the Absolute One–are mere finite and perishable emanations, that is, in fact non-eternal, because the two have to come back, re-absorbed in God at the end of each cycle of cosmic activity.
So, they are just primary forms of those two fundamental principles of phenomenal activity –Spirit and Body– observed by man as something obvious in every phenomenon.
Nothing can be said about the mechanism of the emanation, because it is beyond human possibilities. But we can emphasize that emanations are not aspects of God, and state that the said emanations are like thought forms of God; in this way, you cannot think about certain duality in the One, that is, in God.
Also, schools disagree about concepts related to Eternity. In the event you connect Eternity with the concept of permanence, as the result of this idea, both principles would be eternal, infinite and self-existing.
But you can find an explanation of this if you make clear the concept of Eternal. In fact, God, the Absolute One, is Eternal; the phenomenal Universe is just relatively eternal, in the cycle of divine manifestation which admits its appreciation.
This clarification impedes the doctrine about the existence to be branded as being materialistic, even though one should admit, as we said, that ultimately some schools did not get rid from this tendency.
Concepts of the most classical schools will be summed up next, for further clarification of the doctrine and its final outcomes.
We have seen that the so-called Spiritual Principle, instead of being interpreted as Universal Spirit in the sense of undivided Unity, it is translated as innumerable individual, free and independent spirits as a whole.
Otherwise, one would be unable to account for the infinite variety of aspects in nature, because even though one thinks up the One divided into infinite parts, each part would be of His one and the same nature in all, which puts aside the characteristic variability of nature.
Purusha, spiritual principle, has no attributes, is pure Spirit, and his existence can be thought up as perfect peace, rest and happiness till the time of his immersion in the Substance, influencing and guiding it like a magnetic field influences iron.
The so-called soul is determined by this act, that is, the Spirit wraps up in its manifested organisms, and then remains subject to the cycle of the existence.
Existence means hard and painful trial for the Spirit in prison, who longs for his early state of bliss.
So, the doctrine aims mainly at giving liberation means to the soul, to transcend the karmic law and rebirths, and to recover, as an spirit, its original state of freedom.
According to the said school, individual spirits integrating the great Spiritual Principle were entirely free in the beginning, and then were in chains by the attraction and powerful influence of the Substance. As the result of this bondage, the individual spirit gradually lost its state of pure divine consciousness and fell in material deceit or delusion. As if they were real fallen angels, they go across the world, under the illusion of deceptive forms of “maya”, and eventually, after a long pilgrimage, sorrow awakens again in the soul certain vague memory of its true free origin. Then a fight begins to re-conquer its lost bliss, which does not come to an end till the time when the soul achieves this aim after innumerable incarnations.
They state that all aspects and life in the phenomenal world come from combined activities of two principles –spiritual and energetic-material– to such an extent that even each atom of matter is substance animated by an individual spirit. All phenomena in the universe find explanation in this way, from the simplest to the most complex ones.
A you see, this doctrine tries to explain the whole Universe and its changing manifestations, and mainly contains current science conceptions.
The so-called substance is just primordial cosmic substance or cosmic energy evolving, becoming condensed and transmuted again after centuries.
The mind is born of the spirit acting over substance (energy-matter); so, is character is material, such as it is thought still now.
Matter is active by its own energy, being lifeless and insensible if the Spirit does not illuminate it.
By means of these statements, the pure doctrine rises over the materialistic conception about the world, by spiritualizing it with elements that ultimately try to explain the universal evolution.
Substance-matter constantly evolves since its animation by the spirit. It has gone through so many changes and transformations that the individual mind is unable to recognize its own nature. It is still harder for the mind even to imagine the magnificent state of the spirit, which is free before being tied to matter.
But, as the last purpose of this system, they state that the mind can adopt such an attitude of higher understanding and can think up the true nature of the two dual principles that govern and constitute the Universe, through true knowledge, reasoned and scientific discourse, and right behavior, that is, by means of a suitable method of material, mental and spiritual life, and the defeat of passions.
This system denounces the delusion and sham of the earthly living and attempts to free its adepts from chain reincarnations that subject the free spirit to a material and painful life on Earth.
Teaching 10: Vedanta
Of those systems generally following the idea of a theology of the existence, we should mainly emphasize the Vedanta in the East, while also it has reappeared in the West, being specially focused at present on the so-called J. P. Sartre’s existentialism.
Vedanta system deserves special attention in the wake of its antiquity, perfect structure, and wide acceptance and dissemination in present India.
Vedanta system –named after “the last Veda”– is specially based on the last part of Vedas, that is, the Upanishads. We are told its origin is immemorial, and Vyasa, a legendary master, the alleged composer; but others feel that Badarayana is the father of this system; ultimately this would mean that Vedanta really was before Buddhism.
A Vedantin is highly tolerant, recognizes the whole first part of Vedas and accepts it, but he mainly studies the Upanishads, particularly and entirely in connection with the Absolute One, or Brahman, and his phenomenal manifestation.
This system is essentially rational and not founded on faith at all; so, it is satisfactory for all those science-minded spirits, who are seeking their own liberation with a systematic and scientific study of the phenomenal and multiple world in relation to the One.
The said aspect caused this system to be extremely wide and universal, and adapted to momentary particular needs of each individual.
Basically, it states there is only one Reality. All the rest is illusion.
As you see, so wide formulation is flexible and tends to accept any doctrine because one can ever discover something of truth in any doctrine, even though it later states nothing is true, except the only Reality.
As you know, doctrines about the existence hold that the Universe and individual souls emerge as an emanation of the Absolute Brahman, but they do not clarify much how this can be like that.
Vedantins, to the point of being quite idealistic, sustain the only Reality; so, all the rest is illusion or manifestation of the One as multiple, but without an effective and real division.
An illusory universe is the result of ignorance produced by Maya, or illusory appearance. So, instead of existing a manifestation, there is only certain reflection or appearance, because nothing exists, except this unique Reality.
Of diverse Vedanta schools, the Advaita School is the most important.
Its thought has been summed up with the following words: “Brahman is true; the world is false; the soul is Brahman and nothing else”.
As you see, thought became bolder, and instead of individual spirits that lose their identity and freedom by forming an illusory Universe, in Advaita it is Maya that wraps up Brahman. They state Brahman forms an illusory Universe that chains him by “imagining” himself detached as infinite spirits. The Infinite, immersed in a “reverie” of phenomenal world, imagines to be infinite spirit instead of constituting the only Being.
So, as you see, the whole manifestation is illusory.
.Brahman –God– us the only Reality, being indivisible, immutable and unique; the whole phenomenal Universe is fictitious, delusion resulting from a reverie of God, manifested as the illusory separateness of the sensory Universe.
Souls are also illusory in the mind of God, who sees Himself infinitely reflected on the deceitful Maya, and imagines to be multiple and watches Himself with innumerable eyes reflecting Himself.
So, individual souls never stop being Brahman, although while they do not get rid of the phenomenal world, persist in their mistake of being just an illusory Brahman’s reflection or similarity.
So, these fictitious reflections combined constitute the manifestation of Brahman, identified with innumerable forms and personages that only exist in His own imagination.
Individual souls, such as they appear, can escape from the phenomenal world and from the delusion of Maya by recognizing their identity with Brahman.
A soul can become free and again conscious of his true being through real knowledge, that is, through recognition.
Advaitins do not entirely agree with the general doctrine as for the concept of Brahman, as absolute Essence and Substance.
In their view, over and above it means Absolute Existence, absolute knowledge, absolute Happiness, highest fullness.
As for the concept about Maya, it should not be interpreted as delusion or ignorance of individual souls. Even though it is impossible to explain her how, Maya comes up in the beginning of creative activity, and they describe it as the shadow of Brahman, which disappears as the cycle is over.
.Brahman produces Maya and that is why she appears as being real, even though is not so; for this motive, Advaitins see the material cause of the phenomenal Universe in Maya. In fact, Maya is not “something”, –it is the cover of something.
The phenomenal Universe is not reduced to the nothing in the doctrine of non-existence, –it is the illusory appearance of certain underlying reality; that is why, they consider it is real for practical purposes, even though they know it is just an essentially illusory appearance.
This doctrine opens to man a quite wide field of activities, as much in the objective as in the subjective field. It removes any negativity and drives man to act and improve through constant efforts.
But in this activity of life, this doctrine keeps always up high his standard of idealistic postulates, because it preserves ever alive the concept about the essentially divine origin of the soul by recalling men that “only Brahman is true, and the world is false”.
Teaching 11: Theology of the Non-Existence
Just as the so-called philosophies and theologies of the “existence” have brought into being and greatly developed all those things typified as knowledge, so certain schools that had adhered to those postulates typified as “non-existence” have inspired the mystic movement in Humanity as a whole.
Aims and issues in these schools are essentially supra-physical, put aside the knowledge of the phenomenal world, and try to grasp the Fundamental Principle of the manifestation and of its substratum, that is, all those things that exist beyond the primordial principle.
But this means that, ultimately, one must think about the Non-manifest Essence in order to discover its source.
Obviously, one should no reason too much in order to notice that this Non-manifest Essence would stop being unknown and non-manifest in the event of discovering it.
The human mind, however, recognizes to be unable to grasp this mystery, and any efforts in this sense would be vain.
So, the only way to grasp God, instead of being through the mind, should be through a state of similarity, where supposedly the non-manifest aspect stays and yields this fruit: ecstatic knowledge.
As one can see, this way of focusing the knowledge of God is essentially mystic, and goes on to be till our days the basis of the whole mystic movement, as we can easily check it in Saint John of the Cross’ writings, whose thought guides the entire contemporaryChristian mystique.
In fact, the human mind, according to the doctrine, is entirely unable to grasp Divine Mysteries, and as the result of it, its fundamental exponents and great masters never have talked about the Non-manifest One. Thence, the reproach formulated by atheism.
But certainly, the true doctrine does not deny, state, talk or think up about “It”, but simply points how any being –through his own efforts– can achieve higher illuminative knowledge.
The fundamental principle of the so-called doctrine of non-existence is essentially included in the concept of non-permanence.
In fact, according to exponents of this doctrine, the observation of the phenomenal world –the cosmic manifestation– permits to see a constant flow and change in forms and aspects. No moment of relaxation or rest.
Try to grasp a phenomenon at certain moment, and just when you feel that the mind has grasped it, this phenomenon does not exist any more, has disappeared, cannot be actually under control.
Actually, it does not exist and is just a subjective perception of the mind, which is impossible to have under control.
So, as fundamental postulate of this doctrine, we are told that manifestation is nothing more than successive, momentary and unreal perceptions.
And the subjective character of the phenomenological observation is emphasized by the words “perceptions” instead of “sensations”, because senses in se and per se do not give knowledge of the phenomenal world, except through the mind, and this grants a subjective-human character to perception and knowledge.
But permanence is admitted even in this non-permanence doctrine. The concept of absolute unity of God –of the One– remains as an indestructible axiomatic conception in man.
In this frame of continuous changes and instability, the concept about permanence of the One, of the Absolute Self, as some schools call it, takes shape; this postulate leads to this inevitable theological conclusion: if you can consider that only the Absolute Self is permanent, then nothing on Earth, on the Universe, is Self. Everything is “non-Self”.
Everything is unstable. Sensations, perceptions, bodies, consciousness, everything is “non-Self”, illusory.
Nothing like that is substantial; it is just void appearances, deprived of substance and reality.
So, the human ego is just an uninterrupted series and succession of unreal subjective images, void images, fruit of deceitful ignorance.
The development of this concept, till its last consequences, is characteristic in this doctrine that inevitably leads its followers to despise material and mental forms and ultimately mystique.
In accordance with its negative conceptions about the reality of the phenomenal Universe, this school basically follows a method of negation.
In this sense, they needed to follow the method of ancient schools, and first to have and know all aspects of the phenomenal world, and later to deny them.
First, they knew the physical world, and later, they denied it as illusory and false.
Later, they repeated the process in the mental field, trying to reduce here synthetically all concepts to their simplest forms, and then they rejected them as apparent and void, in order to reach a purely spiritual knowledge through annihilation of the mind.
Contemporary mystique has preserved many of these concepts and methods of the ancient doctrine, as you can easily notice remembering Saint John of the Cross’ statement about the night of senses, of the mind, et cetera.
Also, one cannot hold that this doctrine produced or may produce a true theology, because its tendency, instead of being mental-rational, responds to faith, while its masters mainly point to the form, to the way to follow in order to get rid of the ignorant illusion and share the blissful state of harmonious likeness with God.
A gradual achievement of the rational mind by the Aryans and the nationalization of Humanity, brought about a natural decadence in this doctrine, and were it not for its revival through Gautama Buddha, whose teachings revived the flickering flame of mystique and of the path of pure faith, any paradigm of this pure spiritual doctrine would not have survived till our days.
After observing the suffering of Humanity, Gautama Buddha understood that their liberation is not dependent upon refined reason, clever metaphysical discussions, accumulation of knowledge, and development of subtle thoughts, which ultimately can lead man to mental anarchy. So, he always avoided metaphysical discussions and formulated his doctrine in such a way that any man can practice it totally detached from his intellectual capacity. Rather than a new transcendental system, he gave a new concept about duty and moral to his contemporaries and posterity.
Gautama Buddha observes the human suffering and discovers that desire is the root of suffering.
Desire applies to objects of desire, namely, to objects of the phenomenal world, and as these objects are unstable, transient, changing and perishable, their loss constantly implies grief and disappointment. And grief and disappointment become source of this suffering dogging our covetous Humanity attached to phenomenal objects and forms.
This formulation exposes at once a connection between the particular doctrine of Gautama Buddha and the general system of non-existence or non-permanence. Also, one glimpses a method that he recommended, which consisted in overcoming the desire through his eigthfold path.
He formulated a transformation doctrine, being conscious of the deep impression caused in the soul by continuously changing things.
So, life becomes a constant becoming, an uninterruptedly serial manifestation, transformation and extinction. Phenomenal world –the world of senses and mind– only exists moment by moment. Independently of the long or brief duration of a state, everything is becoming, to such an extent that Gautama Buddha says as a capital point of his teaching, “Everything that is subject to an origin is also subject to destruction”.
This becoming has no beginning or end. No static moment can be when the becoming comes to be, because as soon as you think up something having attributes of forms and name, it stops being that which it was, changes and is something different.
Likewise, Gautama Buddha connects the concept of instability to that of subjective perception of phenomena, and states that the (living) Universe is a reflection of the mind.
Just through ignorance one sees and believes in stable things and forms instead of seeing and believing in continuous and uninterrupted processes. So, a continuous flow, artificially separate in sections, is called things, but this is illusory, since life –the Universe– is not a thing, or even the state of a thing –it is a continuous change or movement.
In order to explain the continuity of the world and for lack of a substratum, of a permanent point, Gautama Buddha includes in his doctrine the law of causation as basis of the continuity. Later, the concept about the eternal continuity of the becoming derives from this law of causation.
If something emerges, there is certain cause from which it came to being. If that is absent, this does not become; if that stopped, this stops.
So, what is called a thing is only a force, a cause, a condition, to such an extent that the doctrine states: all things are the product of conditions, and the whole world is conditioned by causes.
Here is the question: if everything responds to a causal law, what about the original cause that has set the system into motion?
Gautama Buddha does not see or find anything permanent in the constant flow of the phenomenal world, but one cannot interpret it as if he had said nothing is real at all.
Gautama Buddha ever eludes the metaphysical field; he gladly admits facts of phenomenal experience so that that the Universe is a living whole, constantly changing and evolving, which refuses any self-division into definite and permanent objects. He does not affirm or deny that there is something permanent behind constant change, and remains indifferent and does not go beyond the experiential world.
That is why he insists: world phenomena only have conditioned experience such as one’s intellect grasps them.
But Gautama Buddha recognizes the Non-manifest One, and admits that to go out of the world of born things and wrapped up in the causal series would be impossible without the Non-manifest One, even though he does not thinks up about Him.
So, the causal picture is complete; on it, the intellect demands a non-conditioned being as condition and cause of the universal phenomenal series.
The Non-manifest One is not in se part of the phenomenal series and cannot have such a condition because it is out of the law of causation, contingency and dependencies.
But the Non-manifest One cannot be totally detached from this law, because in such an event this law would be unreal, for lack of cause and substance.
So, one can notice that everything looks like being real, but is not so. The whole manifestation, the whole existence is a flow from one to another point, and the man is involved in the process and unable to discriminate and separate being from non-being.
So, Gautama Buddha understands human limitations and does not try to enter a inscrutable field and, remaining in the practical range of Humanity as a whole, he passes to Humanity his liberation doctrine though the practice of fundamental virtues.
Teaching 12: The Eightfold Path
Gautama Buddha’s doctrine moves the man away from a purely rational field and points to him certain liberation method as a practical realization: the Path. He must stick to certain attitude for life.
Gautama Buddha set up four fundamental postulates or verities –a whole plan of living based on them. The four postulates are as follows:
To know the existence of suffering.
To know that desire is cause of suffering.
To know that suffering is only removed by annihilating desire.
To know the path to stop suffering through annihilation of desire.
The said path is divided into eight aspects; thence, it is called eightfold path.
Gautama Buddha rejects always extremes; so he is against sensuality and self-mortification at the same time. His path is the mean path.
The first of the eight aspects is RIGHT KNOWLEDGE.
According to it, one must know evil in order to understand the root of evil, and one must know good in order to know the root of good.
The following decalogue sums up evil: Injuring or Killing; Taking away property which has not been given; Wrong conduct in sexual pleasures; False speech; Tale-bearing; Harsh talk; Useless chatter; Covetousness; Cruelty; and Harmful judgment.
Here is the root of evil: desire, wrath and disappointment.
He defines good as abstention of the said ten actions, and the root of good as absence of desire, wrath and disappointment.
One achieves Right Knowledge after understanding suffering and its cause, and after understanding cessation of suffering and the path leading to it.
But when Gautama Buddha introduces this first step of Right Knowledge, he reduces its range at once, to such an extent that it also might be called Right Faith instead of Right Knowledge.
He states that rational knowledge and any speculations about transcendence, ego and other aspects are useless, so, he makes use of his classical example of a man hurt by an arrow, and how useless would be for him to know name, status and physical aspect of the physician before being attended.
Later he poses the karmic law and the conclusive need to overcome it with acts in order to get rid from chain reincarnations.
The second stage is RIGHT INTENTION.
It comprises: the idea of giving up to worldly habits.
The idea of having no evil will, and the idea of abstaining from cruelty.
The third stage is RIGHT WORD.
It comprises: Abstaining from lies in favor of oneself or others.
Abstaining from backbiting, so as to avoid disagreements and contribute to harmony among men.
Abstaining from rude words, so as to avoid rancor and hatred, and instead of it, disseminating love, sweetness and cordiality.
Abstaining from useless conversation. One should speak properly, briefly and clearly.
The fourth stage is RIGHT ACTION.
It comprises: Abstaining from murder. It is against the use of weapons and harmful elements. Man has to be filled with understanding, affection and compassion, practicing mercy with his neighbors.
Abstaining from theft. One only can take that which is given. No desires of somebody else’s things, so as to purify our heart.
Abstaining from fornication. No flesh desires by overcoming barriers between both sexes.
The fifth stage is RIGHT LIVELIHOOD.
One should put aside reprehensible practices to earn a living, by sticking to strict ethics. It specially points those that are source of suffering and direct misery, such as those of butchers, hunters, fishermen and military men. And those that are cause of indirect suffering, for instance, dealing in intoxicating liquors, poisons, weapons and human beings. Also, divination, usury, conjuring, and so on.
The sixth stage is RIGHT EFFORT.
It comprises: Elimination Effort. It consists in having sensations under control, by removing them with efforts of our will so that they do not produce desires, appetites and bad trends.
Self-control Effort. It consists in strengthening one’s will so as to confront any desire, wrath and disappointment, removing it from our mind by means of our will. In order to achieve this purpose we have to replace a bad idea with a good one; to reflect about misery of these evil thoughts; to examine part by part our evil thoughts; and to suffocate all our evil thoughts so that they vanish and dissolve.
The seventh stage is RIGHT ATTENTION.
Here the disciple observes himself and observes others. He observes body, mind and inner phenomena, after having his desires under control. He observes breath-in and breath-out, and deduces the existence of something –the body– which however is just a man in relation to the four elements and its inherent properties: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, form, sound, taste, et cetera.
So consciousness of five aspects of the existence is born, particularly mental aspects: sensations, perceptions, volition, consciousness, and material aspect; but instead of there being actually a creature, there are just five aspects which are dependent on certain causes. The disciple observes all movements of the body and is clearly and totally conscious of what happens around. He observes and knows every detail in his body. He observes births and death, and as Gautama Buddha said, comes to the conclusion that “there are only bodies there”.
He who gets this knowledge, controls dissatisfaction, fear, heat, cold, hunger and thirst, and controls and stands any trouble with patience and meekness.
Also, the disciple observes sensations, and understands that, in absolute sense, no individual can try sensation. “I feel” is just a verbal expression.
Likewise, he observes inner phenomena and comes to the conclusion that there are phenomena, but with no evidence of the reality.
The eight and last stage is RIGHT CONCENTRATION.
Gautama Buddha calls mental acuteness concentration. One has to rely on Right Efforts in order to get concentration.
The practitioner has to be clean of concupiscence, wrath, weakness, unrest and doubt.
Far from sensations and evil, he gets the first step. Now he got rid of the above-mentioned stumbling blocks, but reasoning, reflection, enjoyment, happiness and concentration still remain.
On the second step, he gets mental unity by removing reasoning and reflection.
On the third step, enjoyment disappears, and just happiness and concentration remain.
On the fourth step, just equanimity and concentration remain.
But however high the flight of the spirit may be, one cannot reach Nirvana as long as the least sensation and the subtlest desire remain, and as long as we did not come beyond the formless kingdom. Just by annihilating desires and overcoming any sensations, and through perfect renunciation, one soul can reach this state of divine consciousness, when the individual being has reincarnation and human suffering under control after leaving behind any desires.
Teaching 13: Theology of Creation
The Aryan man had and still has the mission of fully conquering the rational mind, but was unable to escape from the ancestral concept of the unity of God. But the concept about the Non-manifest One, the Absolute One, the Nameless One, if has been preserved and still is preserved in Humanity, not always could be satisfactory to a mind incapable of becoming subtle and of soaring permanently.
A recognition that there are forces higher than our own, a recognition that obviously there is something that ultimately has to contain the whole force and power that we see active in the world and phenomenal world, has led men to a new conception, a new and different point of view –to the conception of a superior entity summing up all higher aspects and constituting ultimately the so-called Personal God.
Ultimately, this conception moves the concept about God, about the Creator, from an inaccessible and unknowable absolute field, from the Absolute Non-manifested One, and qualifies and adorns Him with the most exalted attributes that our mind can imagine.
So, God becomes a super-human image –the Personal God. True Personal Creator of the Universe and of the phenomenal world, the man is then made in His Own image, but different from Him.
So, there is a permanence of a Universal Being different from the permanence of beings in His manifestation.
This conception that can be called purely monotheistic, obviously has an Atlantean source, because those peoples, out of characteristic psychic trends of their race, had the conception about a Unitarian Creative Power of the Universe.
But the preservation and transmission of this intuitive knowledge to Aryans races became humanized to such an extent that, later became an entity, –the Personal Creative God.
Ancient Egyptians, descendants of the Atlanteans, disseminated this concept about a Personal God, center and life of the Universe. He is Him, and nothing else but Him.
This Entity, owner of any attributes and quite qualified, is the source of all souls, made in His Own image and likeness.
So, we are told as a postulate the existence of a Unique, Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient God.
The monotheistic idea came from the Hebrews who, after Moses, left Egypt, and this idea passes later to Christianity. But the pure monotheistic idea, the Creation conception, implies a fundamental human issue.
In fact, the Creation idea implies the existence of a Creator different and detached from His Own Creation. God will create man in His Own image, but He will be ever different; man will be detached from Him.
This is a really excellent idea, but cannot last long time in the spirit of man who vaguely intuits his divine source and longs for his union with God.
A pure monotheistic conception cannot solve intimate issues and aims of the human soul who feels eternally exiled, distant and detached from God. Man cannot resignedly accept such an event.
So, all Creation systems sooner or later feel forced to leave their quite pure conceptions, and to build a bridge to meet wishes of deification and human liberation.
So, one notices that all those conceptions reveal sometime the idea of Redemption, of a Messiah, –ultimately, the idea of grace.
As we said, an intuitive concept of unity with God exists in every being, that is, a concept of his eventual identification with the Divine.
But this chance is apparently impossible to an speculative theist, because in spite of being a son of God and begotten by Him, this God is different from him. Man never can become God; there is a not-to-pass circle, it is absolutely impossible.
This thought becomes obsessive, and one’s mind that is ever agile and flexible, ultimately rejects it as unacceptable, in spite of the intimate wish of our soul.
If God is different from His Own Creation, if God is one, and Humanity somebody else, a connection, a bridge must however exist and unite these two separate concepts.
So, the idea of a Messiah, of a Redeemer arises.
The Redeemer is God conditioned by mental possibilities of man, by the human mind. The Divine Mind will be reduced to a relative human mind, and God Himself will become man.
The Redeemer becomes a connection between God and man, and nothing or everything will be made just through His mediation.
Man is different from God, so he cannot directly be like Him, and makes use of the Mediator’s image to achieve it through Him.
Krishna, Christ, the Messiah: here are symbolic images and personages of this idea.
No pure Creation theology can give the human being his possible divine aspiration.
Judaism, which originally kept the pure monotheistic idea, and is the source of Christendom, introduced at certain time the idea of a Messiah, in order to build a bridge toward a God inaccessible and detached from Humanity.
Ultimately this thought current totally tends to give the man a chance, since he cannot recognize himself as God, as in other systems, and is unable to reach Him through the conception of a Redeemer, of a Messiah, –ultimately through that which Thomas Aquinas developed masterly as Theology of Divine Grace.
As a religion, Creation doctrines contain however a germ of heresy in front of the orthodox teaching.
Pelagius’ heresy is a classic and clear example of it in the early times of Christianity.
In fact, man is naturally image of his most perfect Creator and, therefore, he enjoys essentially identical attributes. Later he succumbs to sin out of his own will, by exercising his free will, and being immersed in evil, he is expelled from Paradise.
So, Pelagius argues, if man has lost his relationship and intimate union with God out of bad use of his free will, it is man himself who can re-conquer this lost chance by using his free will in the exercise of good.
As we can see at once, such proposal entirely removes Christ’s figure or, speaking in wider sense, removes any Messiah’s idea and conception, incorporated by orthodoxy in the religious belief of man. This belief would collapse because man would be able to unite intimately with God without a Redeemer, and the whole religious system built around a Messianic Creation doctrine would come down.
If sin is evil detaching man from God, and if this sin can be overcome by simple efforts of man, then one does not need a Messiah and, for example, Christ’s figure would lose its fundamental significance.
Practically, the whole Creation conception, the whole Creation theology implies three essential aspects.
INCARNATION. That is, descent of a Divine Being among men, who wears human attire to take part in life, human suffering and power, through an act of sacrifice, and to atone for all sins, all evil where Humanity remains immersed. It is the descent of God to Earth in human form.
REDEMPTION. It is sacrifice of God for the benefit of Humanity, as we have just said. It is atonement made by God Himself for the benefit of His Own creatures; the infinite God’s mercy shines there in front of human sin.
SALVATION. Through this God’s atonement and immolation on the altar of Humanity, man gets his chance of salvation and eventual intimate union with Him. And if this cannot be directly achieved, the fundamental yearning of Humanity can come true: getting the Divine Union.
Practically, Creation conceptions and their religions and theologies ever became restrictive.
They proclaim a Revealed Divine Law, and subject man to it. Man can live, move and develop in it, but here, on Earth, being unable to escape from the circle imposed by this Law.
After death, and out of Divine Grace’s mercy, man can encompass all. He can think and understand all mysteries and grasp all Arcana of science; but he will be unable to achieve this aim here, on Earth.
Christendom and its religions and derived churches become a clear example of Creation concept.
Early Christendom was open-minded and tolerant as for flights of the human spirit. But after certain conceptual crystallization and formation of that which ultimately became a church, those thoughts were gradually reduced and extirpated.
Those who tried to elude that restriction were condemned and put aside.
All thoughts had to respond to a Christ concept, and man never can try to think up beyond, and flight beyond prearranged human limits.
God, One in His Trinity, is Supreme Knowledge; but man cannot reach Him, except through the Son, by means of His Redemption and Salvation. He can know only indirectly, not directly. Not in this life, but after physical death, when the soul is sure of the salvation through redemption.
Man lives in the Creation concept and is like a caged bird. He sees and watches the infinite space, longs for flying, wishes to sink in the infinite abyss. But he must be resigned to long for certain liberation that only death –cessation of earthly life– can give him after a life of sacrifice, dedication and renunciation.
Teaching 14: The Concept about Trinity
Since immemorial times, as soon as the light of reason started shining in man, he has wondered about the motive of existence. As his existence runs parallel with the existence of the whole Universe, the said question was larger and larger and, finally, focused the manifestation. But, at his point, the man had to recognize that he was unable to grasp God and the manifestation mystery.
The human mind cannot know how, when and why manifestation is. The divine mystery is beyond his chances, and he must be resigned or accept it so. One cannot think up about the Absolute, Eternal and Unknowable One, or about Creation itself.
But the man longs for knowing God, because without this knowledge he is even unable to know himself as for his own essence, and this wish has been a powerful mental incentive, at least to know something and to lift a little part of a veil covering the manifestation mystery.
That is why, as God’s Creative act itself is unknowable by man, man focuses his mental forces on apparent Creation results in order to get this way an illuminating glimpse.
The result of this effort has taken shape in the concept about Trinity, known and stated by ancient sages, and later extraordinarily promoted by Christianity.
We are told that the man ever tried to grasp the divine mystery through apparent Creation results.
One cannot come from Non-manifest to Manifest One, because we would start from the unknown and unknowable, that is, from the Big Nothing. But if one simplifies the concept about manifest and knowable Creation and subtilizes this concept backwards, we can think up that the Sleeping Mother emerges at certain time unknown and inaccessible to man. So, God’s Unknowable Principle wakes up, and manifestation starts.
This emergence, this awakening involves a true creative act, and establishes the potential Creation Principle, which contains the whole manifestation power.
This Creative Principle possesses, so to speak, acquires self-consciousness and, through self-recognition, establishes its active self-knowledge. Unity acquires a dual aspect; one is reflected on its own consciousness and becomes two. And this self-knowledge, this self-reflection establishes a relationship, connection and vibratory field, which lasts for the whole duration of one cycle of Creation. A vibration recognized as infinite and uncreated love, which is the support of the whole Creation. It is Fohat, or life of the Universe.
No ancient school strove for divulging this exalted Trinitarian conception, only known to most advanced disciples, because in fact it is too near to the Non-manifest One and tries to think up about it.
But Christendom has brought it out to support and demonstrate Christ’s divinity and, by making of this revealed truth an article of faith, introduced it into the field of Theology.
Christian Theology developed and enlarged the matter about Trinity, and was able to illuminate extraordinarily the concept about persons of the Divine Trinity, and their own relationships.
Christian Trinity comprises Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
God Father is God Creator, Unknowable Creator Principle; that is, First Principle like the ancient Trinitarian doctrine interprets it. This does not mean that the other persons of the Trinity are not also Creators, but they appear in a different way.
The Son is part of God, total part of Himself, who knows His Own existence. It is God’s self-knowledge emerged from the Second Person of the Trinity. That is why, rightly, the Catholic Dogma states that the Father begot the Son as pure, divine and co-substantial expression of the Eternal Will and Knowledge.
The Son is co-substantial with God Father, the very God, as the Dogma states, because is just God’s knowledge and consciousness about His Own existence.
Later, the Dogma states that the Holy Spirit comes from the Father and from the Son, and is not begotten.
In fact, God Creator (Father) knew and begot Himself (Son), and in knowing Himself He loved Himself (link of union).
This Divine and Uncreated Love, above-mentioned as Fohat, is the Holy Spirit, not-begotten and resulting from the relationship between the first two persons of the Trinity.
Creation and the emergence of the three persons is forcefully a simultaneous and unknowable act.
At the first moment, when the First Mystery comes up out of inscrutable divine mystery, simultaneously the Second Person comes up and the link is established, that is, the Third Person.
Otherwise, God’s omniscience would be denied.
That is why, the three persons, at the same time, are eternally Existing, eternally Creators, and eternally Fruit and Sustenance of the Creation.
A Trinitarian knowledge about God, through Theology based on Revelation and assisted by reason, has opened to man –specially to Catholics– a quite wide perspective and possibility.
Of course, souls are individual only through certain appearance explained by the law of analogical oppositions; that is, only as consequence of active manifestation, which implies certain detachment from the static center and subsequent dual aspects.
Man perceives his real and intimate link with God, and his abode in Him, and that only can find Him by seeking and striving for.
God becomes a living concept, ever existing, ever in contact with the human soul. And this contact can increase and become more and more intimate through knowledge and love.
This doctrine yielded extraordinary fruits in Christian mystic souls, by exalting them to the utmost.
Also, the concept about the Son God’s Envoy –the Divine Incarnation– has the same foundation; He descends periodically to stay among men in order to serve as luminous paradigm of perfection.
Teaching 15: Theology of the Divine Incarnation
Theologies of “Existence” and Theology of “Non-Existence represent two ends of the conception about the Universe and man.
Theology of Divine Incarnation represents a mean position; it is actually the mean theology of being and non-being.
Also, as fundamental concept is based on the Absolute Unity of God.
Manifestation is illusory, and it is only true the Eternal One, the Non-manifest One, the Ever-Existing Spirit.
Illusion born of ignorance begets in a being the concept of separateness, but an individual being that gets the realization overcomes this false idea and gets necessary enlightenment to understand statically the Absolute Unity of the Universe with God.
The human mind is unable to achieve by itself this understanding.
So, one can properly state, using the concept of permanence, in the conception of this doctrine, that the Divine Permanence in the individual being stops being so as soon as it enters the field of mental perception.
In other words, the human mind is like a thick veil impeding man to know God; a man cannot know rationally God, because he is unable to grasp His mystery, His true essence.
The intimate and natural union between God and man is clouded by concepts of separateness built by one’s mind, which creates an illusion in man, –illusion of unreal, non-existent existence.
That is why wise instructors in this doctrine ever avoided to think up about the Non-manifest One, about It, and oriented his activities according to this characteristic postulate: Everything is illusion; the Eternal One is the Only Truth.
Knowledge of this Only Truth is the highest goal of the student, who must succeed in concentrating entirely his thoughts on only one idea, the Only Idea, which represents out of is concentration as extraordinary state of mental elevation as to produce so wide state of consciousness that the concept of separateness, “You are You” gives up in front of “You are It”.
Mother’s sages ever followed the general guideline of this conception, based on the idea of Being and Non-being.
They understood how strong may be a fervent wish of knowledge, but also they admitted those limitations preventing from a total knowledge about the essence of God.
For instance, if one stated that God and the Universe is one and the same thing, that His Spirit abides on all existing things, and that consequently God evolves and becomes perfect with all existing things, then we would state that what we think up as essentially perfect must become perfect through His manifestation: this is absurd.
If one stated that the Universe is an emanation, a creation of the very substance of God, also this would be absurd, because the Universe is obviously imperfect, as you can easily see. The Universe evolves constantly to become perfect, but, although is like God, never will be God.
Then a duality comes up, a concept about a God detached from His Universe –one perfect, and the other eternally imperfect– which is inconsistent and poses the insolvable mystery as for why Creation came up.
The mind has tried similar formulation innumerable times, and never could get a solution or solve the fundamental mystery about why the Divine Manifestation came up.
You can get a vague and general concept about God by means of reason. Intuition widens it, although dimly, and ecstasy may give a clear knowledge about the beatific vision, but will ever be just a reflection, and never direct truth.
But when our mental faculties become more acute through right discursive thought, all this process clarifies and dispels doubts; it is likely that result never is a total knowledge about God, but can produce a sensation of its gradual possession.
Here is the essential significance of Theology, which does not give an answer about mysteries of God, but raises man to Him, and sanctifies and enables man for a more perfect living, although being unable to reveal him great Divine Mysteries about Non-manifestation and Manifestation.
A theologian must keep silent in front of these Mysteries.
In fact, of course the Non-manifest One does not admit a definition. On the other hand, as for the Divine Manifestation, we can admit that privileged beings may consider it as for its indissoluble unity, and glimpse the indestructible Universal Spirit as a whole, and even the Fundamental Principle of the Universe.
Does this mean that we are in front of two different Spirits?
Nothing makes sense for the Non-manifest One. Negation, and even matter, mind and energy make no sense. It has no beginning, end, emptiness or fullness. We use the word “Nothing”, even though the meaning of this word is beyond nothing or something.
We do not succeed in showing the Reality of the Manifestation upon the basis of the Non-manifest One; but Manifestation is the best demonstration of the Non-manifest One, and we can properly state that It Which Is, never stopped being that Which Is Not.
The great game, the mysterious relationship between Non-manifest One and Manifest One is something that a man is unable to grasp. So, as we said, true wise men keep reverently silent in front of this matter, and just think up about manifestation.
And when they consider the Manifestation, state that God, EHS, the Divine Manifestation, is Principle, Only and Absolute Root of the Universal Creation; it is His own essence and existence.
In front of this statement, diverse doubts and questions arise at once and it is necessary to clarify them.
In fact, if God, of course in the field of the Manifestation, is infinite, unknowable, and so on, how can He bring into being this finite, relative, knowable and multiple Universe? How does the non-caused thing bring into being the causality?
Some reply that even in His finite Universe, God never stops being that which He is, and that Creation is an illusion, but in such an event the said illusion would be something different from its originator, and then we would have a Universe totally detached from his Creator and different from Him.
Others say God is immense as a whole and inseparably united with His Universe: that all and everything is God. But this explanation implies that all and everything should be static and unchanging, when in fact the constant evolution, the becoming, is the characteristic of the Manifest Universe.
Also there is a tentative explanation: God created something from Himself, like Him, and that He never can become Himself for the whole Eternity.
Even this explanation is not satisfactory, because then God would not be the only absolute principle, for there ever would be something outside Him, which, although similar, would not be Himself.
But it is possible to find a proper answer thanks to the application of the law of analogical opposition.
This law enables to state that God, the Manifestation, has the same essence and existence of the Absolute One, although apparently comes up like that.
The Eternal One offers Himself in such a way that apparently is somebody else: it would seem two instead of One.
While this apparent duality last, God is Eternal essence and existence, and His Universe is permeated by His essence and existence, but this is not essence and existence in Se.
So, through this law of analogical opposition, the Eternal One comes up as finite and conditioned by manifesting Himself, but as soon as the movement of the manifestation stops, everything is again that which was, and He will become again that which never stopped being.
The Infinite One, the Absolute One is just apparently finite in the Universe.
You have seen the theological concept about Manifestation in Se.
Which is now the concept upon which the Universal Creation rests?
There are two theological tendencies about Creation, two concepts that state: one that the Universe co-exists with God and is eternal with Him, and the other that the Universe has been created in the time and not from the eternity. You can see them as the doctrine “ab aeterno” and the doctrine “in tempore”.
Both doctrines represent extreme tendencies, which disagree with the mean theological doctrine here considered.
In fact, the whole Creation implies a beginning; so a doctrine “ab aeterno” would be impossible because it would mean a beginning in the Non-manifest One, in which there is no beginning, end or any knowledge.
Even the doctrine of a Creation “in tempore” is unacceptable because it would be something detached from the existence of God, and even the aspect of a non-prearranged Creation would be inconsistent.
So, we can agree with a mean interpretation.
Creation is eternal as manifestation. Unknowable God contains potentially all aspects and factors determining the Creation. Creation is potentially eternal.
But it is not eternal as expression of God; it is limited in the time, in a period of duration.
It springs up from the bosom of God and withdraws, and later comes back again to the bosom of God.
That is why we are told that the Divine Creation of the Universe is potentially eternal and contained in Unknowable God, but actively made for a period of time determined by Knowable God.
Still we expect an answer about how God has instrumented His Universe.
Some people say God made it from the Nothing, in the sense of the Non-manifest One; and others say God emanated the Universe from Himself, from His Own Substance.
Both statements, expressed like that, are not satisfactory because reveal inconsistencies.
If God creates the Universe from Himself, from His Own Substance, one should admit that this eternally simple substance would be composed by the Creation, which is inconsistent, because as we said, the substance of God is eternally simple and cannot stop being like that.
Even He cannot create it from the Nothing because it would mean the existence of something in the Non-manifest One previous to the Creation, and consequently different from God.
There is only one possible interpretation: God made the Universe from His Nothing, but this concept in this sense: from His immense emptiness of potential state, an unknowable state beyond the human mind, and that He created something free, new, previously uncreated and unique with that Nothing.
So, God created the Universe from the eternal, but in the time fixed by the Divine Law. He created it from the immense potential Emptiness of Himself, with His Own Differentiated Substance Itself.
The idea of Being and Non-Being, of Potential and Active, and vice versa, flows through all these concepts.
Teaching 16: The Divine Incarnation
From the times when man, through his developing reason, was able to think, imagine and interconnect rationally and even observe the phenomenal world, the Manifestation around, with a critical view, he started discovering relationships and analogies between that which ultimately is called Macrocosm and Microcosm.
The said discovery, united with the ancestral impulse toward God, toward this eternal feeling, toward this eternal intuition about his divine source, leads to the emergence in the mind of man (of Masters Initiates and successive disciples) the idea and wish if deifying himself, of becoming god, or directly or through the union with the true Macrocosmic God.
This analogy stirs the conviction that the human soul contains necessary power so that man can manifest his most splendid attributes, and if man actually possesses the power of the Creation, he can reach God and come near Him as a whole.
But there is a stumbling block: total inner disharmony.
The human soul is unbalanced, and oscillates between knowledge and affectivity. Knowledge and faith fight each other as enemies.
Even the Trinitarian concept, being understood and grasped, was unable to comprehend the human soul with its concept of life and love. It was an abstract concept which just illuminated the human soul to certain extent, and even those exalted beings who grasped in depth the ancient Trinitarian concept, kept certain separateness and superiority in front of the human mass that did not reach those states.
These perfect men, these chosen beings, always keep something, a stain, a bond; so, they are unable to represent entirely this human-divine ideal, and cannot be paradigms or guides orienting and channeling those wishes of human deification.
The Abstract Divine Trinity nothing can do in the human soul. It must be concrete and materialized in a quite perfect being, similar to men, but with different nature: so, this demands a true Divine Incarnation.
All revealed holy texts refer to this extraordinary being, a living image of the perfect, ideal man; a paradigm for the whole Humanity to trust and feel sure, because by imitating and loving him –which is another form of being united– they will succeed in finding the path to God, since he is messenger, guide, and God’s envoy.
This being, the Divine Incarnation, does not belong to the human cycle. His nature is truly divine and beyond the mental reach of man.
But he takes part in the nature of the divine and human mind at the same time: divine, because he belongs to another cycle of life, not to the human one, and expresses perfectly and co-participates in the Trinity; and also human, because he has to be of the same human nature in order to be a paradigm for man.
His birth is divine, with no stain or Karmic Law of cause and effect, but he carries over his shoulders the whole karma in order to incarnate, in order to be man.
Incarnation is true sacrifice. His life and his death are human and a part of the whole sacrifice.
The Trinity is fully active in Him, it is Himself.
All gifts of love, knowledge and life find quite wide expression through Him: he is image of human fullness.
The Mystery of the Divine Incarnation is one of the most important in Theology, and although it has brought about tremendous controversies, the figure of Incarnated God has illuminated the souls of men and led them to exalted moral and spiritual experiences.
Teaching 1: Sources of Theology
Teaching 2: Divisions in Theology
Teaching 3: Existence of Theology
Teaching 4: Bases and Method
Teaching 5: Postulates
Teaching 7: Aryan Concept about Creation
Teaching 8: Evolution of Dogma
Teaching 9: Theology of the Existence
Teaching 10: Vedanta
Teaching 11: Theology of the Non-Existence
Teaching 12: The Eightfold Path
Teaching 13: Theology of Creation
Teaching 14: The Concept about Trinity
Teaching 15: Theology of the Divine Incarnation
Teaching 16: The Divine Incarnation