|
Post by maat on Mar 21, 2011 22:55:47 GMT
Re Shamanism, Tamrin... Are you just against certain individuals who claim to be so, or do you believe all shamans to be quacks? This is not about me, but since you ask: I was taught to be cautious and I try to practice Viveka (discrimination between the real and the unreal), believing it to be the first step on the path of wisdom. With discipline, one learns to be alert to logical absurdities; factual errors; dodgy definitions and translations; anachronisms; and bogus qualifications. Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who claim to have found it
Andre Gide (1869 - 1951) French critic, essayist, & novelist Good point Tamrin. I was taught to be cautious too. So how did you reconcile this caution with the Bible, Old and New Testament - or any other Holy Book for that matter? I still have difficulties in those areas. However, I have been know to call upon every 'holy' person I can think of when if times of extreme danger or difficulty, and someone always comes to my aid. Not sure who the someone is so guess I will have to curry favour with all of them
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Mar 22, 2011 2:44:32 GMT
Good point Tamrin. I was taught to be cautious too. So how did you reconcile this caution with the Bible, Old and New Testament - or any other Holy Book for that matter?
I still have difficulties in those areas. I am not a fundamentalist, so I apply the same strict caution, believing these Holy Books to contain mostly allegorical rather than literal truths (along with heaps of ugly propaganda).
|
|
|
Post by anubis on Mar 22, 2011 23:16:38 GMT
Good point Tamrin. I was taught to be cautious too. So how did you reconcile this caution with the Bible, Old and New Testament - or any other Holy Book for that matter?
I still have difficulties in those areas. I am not a fundamentalist, so I apply the same strict caution, believing these Holy Books to contain mostly allegorical rather than literal truths (along with heaps of ugly propaganda). I remain skeptical of the veracity of all so-called revealed books.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 22, 2011 23:29:58 GMT
And revealed information.. to people like Abraham, Amos, Noah. We are told on one hand that no-one can look upon God and live, yet all these people say that God appeared to them and spoke to them. I don't for a moment disbelieve that something extraordinary might have happened to them, but I do question their interpretation of the event/s.
|
|
|
Post by anubis on Mar 23, 2011 0:13:18 GMT
And revealed information.. to people like Abraham, Amos, Noah. We are told on one hand that no-one can look upon God and live, yet all these people say that God appeared to them and spoke to them. I don't for a moment disbelieve that something extraordinary might have happened to them, but I do question their interpretation of the event/s. Abraham wrestled with god and was injured in the groin... (god grabbed his junk? )
|
|
|
Post by anubis on Mar 23, 2011 0:14:00 GMT
And revealed information.. to people like Abraham, Amos, Noah. We are told on one hand that no-one can look upon God and live, yet all these people say that God appeared to them and spoke to them. I don't for a moment disbelieve that something extraordinary might have happened to them, but I do question their interpretation of the event/s. I don't think any of them were actual people.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 23, 2011 3:17:05 GMT
Good call. Geoffrey Hodson has this to say about that subject. People Personify Human Qualities
The Second Key is that each of the persons introduced into the stories represents a condition of consciousness and a quality of character. All the actors are personifications of aspects of human nature, of attributes, principles, powers, faculties, limitations, weaknesses and errors of man. When purely human beings are the heroes, the life of a person evolving at the normal rate is being described. When the hero is semi-divine, however, the accent is upon the hastened progress of the Spiritual Self in man after it has begun to assume preponderant power. When the central figure is an Avatar or "descent" of an aspect of Deity, his experiences narrate those of the Spiritual Self during the last phases of human evolution to the stature of perfected manhood. Such is the general purpose, and such the method, of the ancient writers of the world's immortal allegories, parables and myths.
The Deity or Father, when introduced into a narrative, generally refers to the Highest Spiritual Essence in man, the Divine Spark, the Immortal Germ, the Logos of the Soul, the Dweller in the Innermost, the Monad. This is especially true where the Supreme and Eternal Deity, the Logos, is brought into the story. A tragic, mind-darkening degradation of the Universal Self named "I AM THAT I AM," to the level of the deity of a single tribe, sometimes bloodthirsty, wrathful and jealous, is thought by some authorities to have been made in the days of the restoration by Ezra of the destroyed books of the Israelites. The Supreme Emanator, referred to as "God" and "the Spirit of God," is above all things universal and divine. The limitation of the one uncreate to become the personal god of a single tribe had led to much confusion and an appalling debasement of the idea of the Supreme Deity. Whenever the Eternal One is introduced into a narrative, it is always susceptible of interpretation as a personification of the Monad of man, as also of the Oversoul of the race.
In the parable, the bosom of Abraham into which Lazarus, "a certain beggar," was carried by the angels, refers to the state of consciousness in which the human Monad perpetually abides and to which the Spiritual Soul or Immortal Ego eventually attains. Those following the initiatory path seek to hasten this realization, in waking brain-consciousness, first of their divine, immortal nature, and thereafter of their unbroken unity with the Supreme Lord of all. The full recognition of man's unity with God, of the oneness of man-spirit with God-spirit, is the ultimate goal of all who seek the strait gate and enter upon the narrow way. In Hinduism this state is called moksha or liberation; in Buddhism, nirvana or conscious absorption; and in Christianity, salvation, ascension, Christhood, and being "carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom." The symbol of the disciple John leaning on the bosom of Jesus is susceptible of a similar interpretation. Thus Abraham, as also many other people in the Bible, personates both a principle of man and a state of consciousness.
In this method of Biblical study the characters - divine, semidivine, patriarchal and human - are regarded as personifications of principles and powers of nature as the macrocosm and of man as the microcosm. This reading is supported by Paul, who writes: "all these things happened unto them for ensamples" and "it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman ... which things are an allegory ...". It is not unreasonable to assume that such a theory may also be true of many other portions of the Bible. One may even go further than this and assert that the practice of studying the scriptures of the world in their literal meaning, and as records of actual historical events alone, can lead to serious confusion of mind.
lcc.cc/yr/fourkeys.htm
|
|
|
Post by maat on Mar 23, 2011 4:19:53 GMT
And revealed information.. to people like Abraham, Amos, Noah. We are told on one hand that no-one can look upon God and live, yet all these people say that God appeared to them and spoke to them. I don't for a moment disbelieve that something extraordinary might have happened to them, but I do question their interpretation of the event/s. Abraham wrestled with god and was injured in the groin... (god grabbed his junk? ) Probably trying to retrieve His one big mistake ..
|
|
|
Post by anubis on Mar 23, 2011 4:59:27 GMT
Abraham wrestled with god and was injured in the groin... (god grabbed his junk? ) Probably trying to retrieve His one big mistake .. LOL! ;D
|
|
|
Post by jayman on Mar 29, 2011 15:24:01 GMT
Back to the topic.
I see the argument on the position of appendent degrees. Are they higher or not.
However, within the craft lodge itself (ignoring Grand Lodge positions) the degree of Master/Paster Master exists. It has its' own Unique grips, tokens, words, aprons and access. Sounds like a degree to me. One that is higher than an MM
|
|
|
Post by aogop on Mar 29, 2011 19:02:24 GMT
Jayman, that degree you mention is part of our Grand Lodge's "Secrets of the Chair" ceremony for those Masters who have just been installed in their new office. I guess if one wants to say being a WM is "higher" than your run of the mill MM, then that degree would be technically true but WMs all eventually return from whence they came, making it all temporary anyways.
|
|
|
Post by jayman on Mar 29, 2011 22:09:12 GMT
Jayman, that degree you mention is part of our Grand Lodge's "Secrets of the Chair" ceremony for those Masters who have just been installed in their new office. I guess if one wants to say being a WM is "higher" than your run of the mill MM, then that degree would be technically true but WMs all eventually return from whence they came, making it all temporary anyways. Fair point.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Mar 29, 2011 23:48:02 GMT
We should distinguish between Rank and Degree.
I can only speak for UGLE the Duke of Kent holds the rank of a 33rd degree Mason he is not superior to a Master Mason he is still a Master Mason.
The Worshipful Master holds the Rank of WM or then Past Master. He is still a Master Mason.
The best Masons I have known treat an EA the same as a Grand Master. The best Grand Masters do the same.
|
|
|
Post by jayman on Mar 30, 2011 1:55:45 GMT
We should distinguish between Rank and Degree. I can only speak for UGLE the Duke of Kent holds the rank of a 33rd degree Mason he is not superior to a Master Mason he is still a Master Mason. The Worshipful Master holds the Rank of WM or then Past Master. He is still a Master Mason. The best Masons I have known treat an EA the same as a Grand Master. The best Grand Masters do the same. Then explain why a PM has a unique apron, like each of the 3 degrees, his own tokens, words and rituals. Meets all the definitions of a Masonic degree to me
|
|
|
Post by jayman on Mar 30, 2011 1:57:35 GMT
After all, no PM reverts to an MM apron after they finish their term in the East
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Mar 31, 2011 12:11:38 GMT
Some snips from Masonic info , we must first understand the terms. www.masonicinfo.com/master.htmUse of the word 'worshipful' continues today in titles such as "The Worshipful Lord Mayor of Dublin" Masons are required to obey the Master of a Lodge about as much as but no more than any member of any voluntary association or organization is required to obey the President of that organization. There is nothing more and nothing less involved. Can the President of the local softball club order you to commit murder? Of course not - and neither can the Master of a Lodge! Can the Chairman of your Community Club direct how you should live your daily life? Of course not. Would he or she compel you to do anything against your religious beliefs or patriotic intentions? Hardly.... The Words....... Worshiful = 1. respectful form of address used in the name of livery companies (such as "The Worshipful Company of Scriveners") 2. Used in titles given to justices of the peace and to certain old corporations or their officers the Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths 3. Entitled to honor or respect Master A master craftsman or master tradesman (sometimes called only master or grandmaster, German: Meister) was a member of a guild. In the European guild system, only masters were allowed to be members of the guild. One whose teachings or doctrines A worker qualified to teach apprentices and carry on the craft independently To make oneself a master of So a 'Worshipful Master' is a Master [ a teacher , a Rabbi etc] of arts and science who deserves respect becuse he has proved his worth. He is a Master Mason who was selected and elected by Master Masons, to rule over the Lodge for one year.
|
|