Morality & Supermorality - The Initiate in the New World

page: 1
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 01:08 AM
link   
I've recently come across some old & somewhat-occult books that date back to the 1920s, written by an anonymous author who claims to have spent a number of years (decades) under the official tutelage of an "Initiate" (or a "Master") — which is to say, in the plainest language possible, a highly-evolved human being who has attained a profound depth of insight into such things as unconditional love, wisdom, psychic/mental phenomena and spiritualism.

Now, before I lose you - whether or not you believe these beings exist is not likely to interfere with your perception of this particular piece of literature I am about to share. So if these subjects (morality, wisdom, spiritualism) interest you as either a believer or as a skeptic, I still encourage you to read on, because the perspective offered in this brief extract is enlightening at best, and intriguing at worst.

So with all that being said, here is the extract I read today that interested me enough to re-type it up (to correct some grammatical and typo mistakes in the original) & share it with ATS. Perhaps many of you have heard of these "The Initiate by His Pupil" books before me, and maybe this subject has been broached on ATS before, but I couldn't help but feel upon reading this chapter today that, despite its almost century of age, this discussion that allegedly took place in a small living room of a Boston home in America of 1927 is more relevant today than it has ever been.

(M.H. is the author's pseudonym for the Master's identity)


. . .

When I returned to the Master’s house that evening, I found there some thirty people chatting before settling down for the discourse. M.H. himself moved among them, talking first to one and then to the other; but on seeing me by the door he came forward and introduced me to a young woman and her neighbour.

“This is just to give a start in,” he smiled as he pronounced our names, “but the rule here is that everybody talks to everybody else. What’s the good of all being One unless we behave like it?” he added with humour.

I had, however, little time to profit by my new acquaintanceship, as M.H., going to a chair placed upon a diminutive platform at one end of the room, gave the sign that the talk was about to begin.



Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.
edit on 8/25/2014 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 01:08 AM
link   

“Take such a simple example as deception. Are any of you so innocent as to suppose that even I, whom you are pleased to call your Master, would not and do not deceive you when I think it is for your own good? Yet there are those who would hold up their hands in horror at such an idea. ‘A Master deceive or tell a lie – unthinkable, impossible!’



Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.
edit on 8/25/2014 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 01:09 AM
link   

“And so you must realize that we who are trying to tread the path of Wisdom cannot take the same view of morals as the world at large takes; that we require something more elevated, more elastic, more spiritual; that in view of the fact that morals not only change with place and nation and climate, but also with the times themselves, we require a criterion different from mere moral tradition, of what is right and wrong.



Sorry about the paragraphs, the forums messed up Word's formatting so I just had to space them apart. Thanks for reading, and here are the books (as pdf files) if you are interested in learning more about this mysterious character from a past era and what he has to say:

The first book: The Initiate by His Pupil
The second book: The Initiate in the New World by His Pupil
The third book: The Initiate in the Dark Cycle by His Pupil

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.
edit on 8/25/2014 by semperfortis because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 01:27 AM
link   
I don't know if I will ever provide a written rebuttal to this "material." I am not sure of my strength in such a situation. There is one thing I am absolutely sure of, and am compelled to express it in order to have any self-respect.

This is nonsense, and damned nonsense.

People can read and write as they will in this land of freedom. They are also free to drink all the cyanide they care to.

This material is "wrong" in every way. If you have any spiritual discernment, use it here.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: TheAnarchist

I love the concept of super morality. It is almost like the what Jesus said about the Golden Rule.

That will be filed away for use in the mind palace. Thanks!!
edit on 25-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 02:41 AM
link   
This material's message is, accept the deception it is for your own good.

Deceivers have a different morality all right, it is lower not super special better.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Thanks for typing out this great expression of Truth. I like to think of his morality and super morality as relativistic and absolute moralities.
Mores that vary across cultures and time are relative to their conditions, and subject to change. Therefore they are non-permanent and not "true", or even "real" in a spiritual sense.
From one standpoint, you could say these moral beliefs are transient and illusory.
The "supermorality" however is absolute, because its principles are timeless, universal, transcendent in nature. These principles are found in our heart of hearts, not in the code books and rules, brains of man.
I like how he describes conventional morality as a smokescreen of self righteousness so many egotistical people hide behind, and use as basis for their self serving actions.
Wars are fought over morals, the supermoral knows that all wars are wrong. Furthermore, though some morals may justify self-servitude, the supermoralist lives only to serve all others compassionately.




edit on 25-8-2014 by ecapsretuo because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-8-2014 by ecapsretuo because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TheAnarchist

To me, no one has made expressed the idea expressed here more clearly than Nietzsche.


Zarathustra proclaims the Übermensch to be the meaning of the earth and admonishes his audience to ignore those who promise other-worldly hopes in order to draw them away from the earth....As the drama of Thus Spoke Zarathustra progresses, the turn to metaphysics in philosophy and Platonism in general come to light as manifestations of other-worldliness, as well. Truth and essence are inventions by means of which men escape from this world. The Übermensch is also free from these failings.


en.wikipedia.org...

Its really relevant, because it really shaped a huge amount of 20th century history, and its an idea that shapes things today. The utopian systems like communism were based on this idea of putting aside the spiritual/moral, and making heaven on earth such as people can using human reason. But the problem with heaven on earth is always the people. Interests collide and conflicts arise: nature happens. That's why moral systems evolved, to make functional groups that could work as units. Their victories are the rise of civilization. Every social group needs rules to guide it to be effective, they need a sense of right and wrong, of morality.

Now if you look at history, you will see these ubermenschen, these people who shaped things, and sometimes made Machiavellian choices. But I think if you really look in close, you'll also see them working within moral frameworks to get things done, knowing their fallibility etc. In fact many of the most effective people have been very very moral. The reason for this is that most people who throw off the necktie of morality as too restrictive are extremely quick to replace it with the slave collar of natural instinct, and this makes them less, not more powerful. So while a true "super morality" may be out there, for most, I fear, the idea represents nothing more than a path to weakness, not power.
edit on 25-8-2014 by tridentblue because: link added



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 04:42 AM
link   
I'm sorry, but he lost me when he lit his Cigar. If he was enlightened, he'd know better. If he did it for the sake of social norms, that's even worse, because it means he's nothing more then another sheep.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Supermorality, latent psychic powers, chakras, reincarnation, calling people Master and Initiate, phony humility, telling everyone how special they are, subliminally spreading the faith... sounds like a cult to me!

He certainly makes some interesting points, but it really reminds me of a book I used to have, The Alphabet of Wisdom, just a lot of New Age bull# with actual eastern terms thrown in to make people think its deep. Mystery sucks people in.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 04:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Aedaeum

Especially after he spoke of the evils of alcohol, right?



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 05:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Aedaeum

Wait what, choosing to enjoy something that you know is harmful to you somehow invalidates him in some way?

He can't have some sweets, or eat cake at times? Can't enjoy a little alcohol? Where does this narrowmindedness spring.. are you yourselves enlightened, to know such things?

My mom once met a buddhist monk standing around smoking.. she was surprised and asked him about it, he told her it's fine as long as he's mindful doing it.. I can't really argue with that, it's a free will choice, and I can't imagine it magically disappears when approaching enlightenment. Maybe he just likes doing it, isn't that enough?
A preposterous idea to me!

As for deceit, it can at times be useful to a master, illumination is situated on the other side of absolute terror and you think that it would be beyond the playful and or at times even anti-social hermit masters to play a prank on their student? They do it all the time in Taoist and Buddhist koans.
Milarepa's master had him build a tower only for him to subsequently raze it and tell him to build it again.. THREE times.. I'd say that is pretty extreme.

Rearranging the perceptions of the student would be constant and ongoing, to such an extreme that eventually he wouldn't know what's up or down, left or right, white, black, good or evil. They do have a tendency to lean towards madness, the spiritually evolved.. well, at least to "the vulgar", and that's another thing.. they even seem to have a tendency to loathe mankind at times, always using such terms, "the uninitiated", the "intellectual animals".

Laozi became so fed up with how things were going in China that he decided to leave, people were too ignorant.

"While most people take the objects of their senses to be real if anything is, Socrates is contemptuousof people who think that something has to be graspable in the hands to be real. In the Theaetetus, he says such people are "eu a-mousoi", an expression that means literally, "happily without the muses" (Theaetetus 156a). In other words, such people live without the divine inspiration that gives him, and people like him, access to higher insights about reality."

"Socrates says in the Republic that people who take the sun-lit world of the senses to be good and real are living pitifully in a den of evil and ignorance. Socrates admits that few climb out of the den, or cave of ignorance, and those who do, not only have a terrible struggle to attain the heights, but when they go back down for a visit or to help other people up, they find themselves objects of scorn and ridicule."

"So unadvanced.." sayeth the muses.



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 08:26 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

The decievers are those who tell you, they are not decieiving you, yet are, and they know it. They are the ones with closed minds, thinking the Golden Rule only goes one way. To them, not from them to others.

Recognizing the deception, is not condoning the deception.
edit on 25-8-2014 by Not Authorized because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2014 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: tridentblue

You do realize that your subscribing to the philosophy of someone who ended up mentally insane.

I don't imagine someone who's philosophical ideology is sound, goes insane.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: sacgamer25

You do realize you didn't read/understand my post at all, don't you? Here's the simplified version, just for you:

Nietzsche's ideas shaped 20th century movements like Communism, but they didn't work.
People need old fashioned morals to work together.
Many great people in history were quite moral.
Lack of morals makes you weak.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 01:18 AM
link   
I am not sure I correctly understood the OP's. I made certain associations, had certain thoughts in response, but have no idea if they were anything like those other readers had. Interpretation can vary widely from person to person.

My thoughts were-
Having left my country and integrating another culture, what I found is that morals are relative. People bond together and enhance communication and exchange through a shared moral and ethical system.

This makes it so that all those people can read a paragraph, and have some consistancy between them upon how they interpret it, what values an judgements are applied. It is a short cut.

In some way, this system could be called an "illusion"- the people can believe the morals and ethics they have are universal and static- they exist somehow beyond their choice. But this is not true.

Yet if they were to see beyond this "illusion" then life gets more difficult, more complex, more challenging. The experience of bonding and relation become harder to attain.


The seeker of wisdom opens up this "can of worms". I am thinking of the thread titled something like "spiritual gain, social loss?". Yes. Absolutely.

I now have to be mindful of who I am talking to, where they come from, what do they mean to suggest when they say something- is what they just heard going to be judged an insult or a compliment? If I say to a french person "You seem to be financially successful!" it is a insult and criticism... if I say it to an american, it is a compliment and expresses admiration.

Things like honesty are not as clean cut as I used to believe. Is the person who admits to immoral drives or desires openly a bad person? What I have learned is that those who say more, do less. That could be good or bad.
Think about it. Some people talk a lot about the great things they want to do, and never do. Some talk of terrible things they want to do, and never do.

The drive loses much of it's force once expressed outwards, that is why.

Life , the human psyche, is somewhat complex and often paradoxial. The person who admits "faults" will often end up having less of them than the one that denies having them.

I found a strange thing years ago. If I begin my speech or post with "I don't know", what follows (spontaneously and without thought) usually is knowledge, or wisdom, I did not know I had! I think it comes from my subconscious, maybe. But people will say that was a thoughtful post, you must have taken a lot fo time to think about it and write it out.

In fact I NEVER do that. I rely on that non-thinking spontaneous action of my fingers, or my tongue, that comes when my conscious mind and ego lets go and admits, "I don't know". When I let go and embrace that I do not know... suddenly I do know.

This is the type of paradox I am thinking of when someone admits I am capable of lying, yes, I am.
Maybe in that moment of acknowledgement and letting go, truth is what comes out instead?

I don't know. Judgement of others is easy and practical when applying a "universal" morality. But once you are free, you are then struck with no safety nets and comfortable boundries to rely upon. Are you sure you want freedom?

I have come to feel that people who decide to forego it are making a totally rational and comprehensible choice...



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluesma

Wow, what an excellent reply. I read it like three times and thought about it for 20 minutes.

I don't know....

What a phrase. It implies that a truth exists that's beyond what's in my little mind, and in that the possibility for me to challenge myself, to grow, to try and get closer to what's bigger than what I am right now.

I think that's really the key thing about morality, right there: Politeness in France and the US may be different, but in striving to be polite, in either place, we are challenging ourselves, we are learning to control ourselves, we are getting stronger. That to me is really the reason why it makes us strong, because it causes us to always be striving, always seeking self improvement, always thinking of our actions critically.

Peace!



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 09:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheAnarchist

“And so you must realize that we who are trying to tread the path of Wisdom cannot take the same view of morals as the world at large takes; that we require something more elevated, more elastic, more spiritual; that in view of the fact that morals not only change with place and nation and climate, but also with the times themselves, we require a criterion different from mere moral tradition, of what is right and wrong.



Sorry about the paragraphs, the forums messed up Word's formatting so I just had to space them apart. Thanks for reading, and here are the books (as pdf files) if you are interested in learning more about this mysterious character from a past era and what he has to say:

The first book: The Initiate by His Pupil
The second book: The Initiate in the New World by His Pupil
The third book: The Initiate in the Dark Cycle by His Pupil

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.


Right there the pseudo Master is contradictory, in that, he tells us to reject the world, therefore, he rejects being one with the world, and in my experience, the world has much wisdom and experience to offer; we just have to find it for ourselves.



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: tridentblue


I looked at your post again. What I am seeing in your argument is that thier is a greater good. But then you end up back in Nietzsche's ideology by accepting that super morals, a Devine covenant can't be found.

If you can't find a Devine spiritual code than how can you offer the world more than Nietzsche, or even claim that Nietzsche was wrong? Why should anyone listen?

Thier is a divine code, the Holy Spirit and it can be known.
edit on 26-8-2014 by sacgamer25 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2014 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Am I the only one that thought the author was seeing his "master" a little bit too much through rose-tinted glasses?

I thought Watson romanced Sherlock but this author takes the cake.





new topics
top topics
 
11
<<   2 >>

log in

join