I refer back to MotT, which for me is still one of the most profound texts I’ve encountered, and we see our Unknown Friend author keyed in to the deeper octave for these Spiritual Laws…
I. Surrender to the living God ("thou shall have no other gods before me");
II. Non-substitution of products of the human mind, or those of Nature, for the reality of the living God ("thou shalt not make for thyself a graven image, or any likeness");
III. Activity in the name of God without making use of his name in order to adorn oneself with it ("thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain");
IV. Practice of meditation ("remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy");
V. Continuity of effort and experience ("honour thy father and thy mother");
VI. Constructive attitude ("thou shalt not kill");
VII. Faithfulness to the alliance ("thou shalt not commit adultery");
VIII. Renunciation of the desire to accept merit which is neither the fruit of one's own work nor the gift of grace ("thou shalt not steal");
IX. Renunciation of an accusatory role towards others ("thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour");
X. Respectful consideration for the private and personal life of others ("thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house").
For the hermetist, the “fundamental law is meditation, i.e. the practice of "remembering the sabbath day, to keep it holy". Meditation is "sanctified rest", where thought is turned towards that which is above.”
But that’s not to say we don’t support our practice with the other nine laws. Take Spiritual Law VII: Thou shalt not commit adultery. While this conventionally refers to indulging our carnal impulses, our Unknown Friend takes it deeper and notes that we are to hold “Faithfulness to the alliance.” Yes, there is spiritual adultery too. Oops.
He says, “the case when one embraces, for example, the Vedanta or Buddhism, whilst having been baptised and sufficiently instructed in order to have access —given good will —to experience of the sublime Christian mysteries. I am speaking neither about the study nor the adoption of the technical methods of yoga, Vedanta or Buddhism, but only about the case where one changes faith, i.e. where one substitutes the ideal of liberation for that of love, an impersonal God for the personal God, return to the state of potentiality (or nirvana) for the kingdom of God, a wise instructor for the Saviour, and so on.”
Okay, I've transgressed a tad here, but hopefully not too far.
“For nothing is more natural and legitimate than to learn and make use of the benefits of experiences accumulated in the East or West. If western medicine saves the lives of millions in the East, why should not oriental yoga help millions in the West, those engaged in spiritual practice.”
Yup, works for me.
“All the fruits of human experience merit being studied and examined —and, according to their merit, accepted or rejected. But experience is one thing and faith, or metaphysical ideal, is another.”
It does always come back to context. Moreover, is one truly salvaged by their experience or through their faith in God independent of their own efforts and attainments? It would seem to me both would be ideal, and yet many experientially-driven aspirants seem to dismiss the latter.
And how about those entheogens everybody is dabbling with these days (including me)?
“Those seeking transcendental experience by such means evidently want to dispense with the costs of the way of regular spiritual development, in order to obtain cheaply what others obtain only after much effort and sacrifice.”
See Spiritual Laws II. and VIII. There are no free lunches or shortcuts in spiritual progress. And it shouldn't be any other way, since the struggle builds character and integration of experience and knowledge.
Unknown Friend is a kindred spirit: while he dabbled in other New Thought movements, he ultimately came to the Catholic Church while still working from the edges within. Similarly, I often find I'm too exoteric and respectful of tradition for the "spiritual, but not religious" ilk, and too esoteric and heterodox for traditional followers. I suppose I’m not easily categorizable, but in a nonspecial sort of way.
“Regrettable or not, it is a fact that religions constitute a scale of moral and spiritual values. They are not equal —being stages of mankind's evolution over millennia, on the one hand, and successive revelations from above, on the other hand.” — Unknown Friend
But that’s not to say we don’t support our practice with the other nine laws. Take Spiritual Law VII: Thou shalt not commit adultery. While this conventionally refers to indulging our carnal impulses, our Unknown Friend takes it deeper and notes that we are to hold “Faithfulness to the alliance.” Yes, there is spiritual adultery too. Oops.
He says, “the case when one embraces, for example, the Vedanta or Buddhism, whilst having been baptised and sufficiently instructed in order to have access —given good will —to experience of the sublime Christian mysteries. I am speaking neither about the study nor the adoption of the technical methods of yoga, Vedanta or Buddhism, but only about the case where one changes faith, i.e. where one substitutes the ideal of liberation for that of love, an impersonal God for the personal God, return to the state of potentiality (or nirvana) for the kingdom of God, a wise instructor for the Saviour, and so on.”
Okay, I've transgressed a tad here, but hopefully not too far.
“For nothing is more natural and legitimate than to learn and make use of the benefits of experiences accumulated in the East or West. If western medicine saves the lives of millions in the East, why should not oriental yoga help millions in the West, those engaged in spiritual practice.”
Yup, works for me.
“All the fruits of human experience merit being studied and examined —and, according to their merit, accepted or rejected. But experience is one thing and faith, or metaphysical ideal, is another.”
It does always come back to context. Moreover, is one truly salvaged by their experience or through their faith in God independent of their own efforts and attainments? It would seem to me both would be ideal, and yet many experientially-driven aspirants seem to dismiss the latter.
And how about those entheogens everybody is dabbling with these days (including me)?
“Those seeking transcendental experience by such means evidently want to dispense with the costs of the way of regular spiritual development, in order to obtain cheaply what others obtain only after much effort and sacrifice.”
See Spiritual Laws II. and VIII. There are no free lunches or shortcuts in spiritual progress. And it shouldn't be any other way, since the struggle builds character and integration of experience and knowledge.
Unknown Friend is a kindred spirit: while he dabbled in other New Thought movements, he ultimately came to the Catholic Church while still working from the edges within. Similarly, I often find I'm too exoteric and respectful of tradition for the "spiritual, but not religious" ilk, and too esoteric and heterodox for traditional followers. I suppose I’m not easily categorizable, but in a nonspecial sort of way.
“Regrettable or not, it is a fact that religions constitute a scale of moral and spiritual values. They are not equal —being stages of mankind's evolution over millennia, on the one hand, and successive revelations from above, on the other hand.” — Unknown Friend