'Higher beings'

[grahamm]

Hi,

I have just finished reading 'The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive'. I am new to this whole business (I came across the cassiopaea website while I was researching the Priory of Sion because I am related to the last Princess of Vaudemont, which is on the Hill of Sion in Lorraine, which is mentioned in The Holy Blood and Holy Grail) and have not really had time to absorb it all, but it was certainly interesting. The main thrust of the book seems to me to be that the historical evidence, common myths around the world and so on indicate that there are what you might call 'higher beings' of one sort or another and the book explores this idea and, in particular, how ordinary people can become such higher beings (I am probably not putting this very well). But I notice that the book does not cite a single example of 'ordinary people' who have made this transition. I am interested in this because I came across such an example not that long ago - from my mother's family funnily enough (the Senior/Coronel family). I think it would be safe to describe this person as the 'culminating point of Christian mysticism' and a 'perfect model of the highest mystic ways'.*

*'Among the holy souls of past centuries who have been loaded with signal favors and privileges by the Queen of Heaven, we must, without doubt, place in the first rank Mary of Jesus, often styled of Agreda, from the name of the place in Spain where she passed her life. The celebrated J. Görres, in his monumental work, Mysticism, fears not to cite as an example the life of Mary of Agreda, in a chapter entitled, “The Culminating Point of Christian Mysticism.” Indeed, there could be found no more perfect model of the highest mystic ways. Her life is a striking example, in which it is important to study attentively the progress of a soul which, according to the words of the prophet, ascends by degrees to the height of perfection: ibunt de virtute in virtutem - goes from virtue to virtue.' (The Abbé J. A. Boullan, D.D.)

Her name is Maria de Agreda (1602-1655) and she was a nun of the Order of the Immaculate Conception. I came across her while researching my mother's family in Spain. Her uncorrupted body is still held at the convent of the Order of the Immaculate Conception in Agreda, near Soria, Spain. What was remarkable about her was that she was supposed to have travelled between Spain and the New World (New Mexico, Texas etc.) over 500 times by means of bilocation (being in two places at once). In addition, she wrote was has been described as the 5th Gospel of the New Testament which is a life of the Virgin Mary dictated to Mary of Agreda by the Virgin Mary herself. I had never heard of bilocation but, having been trained as a barrister, I though I would try and look at the evidence from a legal angle. I came to the conclusion that she had, in fact, bilocated between Spain and the New World.

In addition, I came across a more recent example of bilocation in Padre Pio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pio_of_Pietrelcina). His 'exploits' were witnessed by people alive during our own lifetimes, including the most senior officer in the US military - General Nathan F. Twining, USAF, Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force (1953-57), Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1957-60).

Anyway, I have put together a page on Maria de Agreda at:

http://www.mariadeagreda.info/index.html

It seems to me that what 'enabled' Maria de Agreda to do what she did was humility, virtue, purity of heart, love of God and man, self-denial and, importantly, a sense of urgency or over-riding need to save souls (those of the Indians). Padre Pio speaks of this sense of urgency. Anyway, for what it is worth, I concluded that the whole thing was actually true. I have absolutely no doubt about this whatsoever. The thing is that if Maria de Agreda did bilocate to the US over 500 times, what does this say about her meeting the Virgin Mary and physically seeing angels and so on? I concluded that all this was true as well. The implications are simply staggering.

I would be interested in any comments.

See also:

http://www.peerage.org/genealogy/pedigree_senior.htm

Graham

 

[axj]

So what exactly does this have to do with the Work, Graham? Are you asking whether people can become 'higher beings' through mysticism?

The links you provided do not seem to work, by the way, except for the one to Wikipedia.

 

[grahamm]

I am not sure how my post is relevant. I don't know what 'The Work' is. I just guessed that this was a relevant category. All I am saying is that the book talks a lot about what one might call 'higher beings' but does not cite any examples. If my post is not relevant to this category perhaps you could identify a category that is relevant. In relation to the general topic covered by the book I would say that Maria de Agreda is pretty much the most extraordinary example in the history of the human race. It's not a question of whether she did what she did but what gave her the ability to do what she did. One thing I didn't mention in my post is that she died in 1665 but I am absolutely certain that we have a recent photograph of her (it's on the webpage). There are numerous reports of her appearing at other times.

I am worried that you cannot access the links. Can you tell me exactly what messages you saw on screen? Thanks.

Graham

 

[Palinurus]

Hi grahamm and to the forum.

FYI, it's customary here to formally introduce yourself in the Newbies board to receive a proper welcome. No personal info is needed, just an elaboration on how you found this forum (like in your original post, but a bit more detailed), whether you're familiar with any of the recommended books around here, and more of the like. You might want to probe a few intros of others to see how this is done...

As a reassurance, your links worked fine for me (Win7+Firefox) but are a tad slow to load. It's an impressive pedigree and an elaborate compilation by just glancing through them. Cannot comment more for now.

As to your query, I searched Laura's text for your term higher beings and found just one mention of that in the whole work (on page 168; confirmed in the index). From the context there I couldn't quite gather the connection with what you wrote above, so I'm at a loss as to what you actually mean by this generalized term. Therefore I would invite you to make yourself more clear. Searching for this term at CassWiki brought three pages of miscellaneous results, three of which I will display here to help you get started:

The Secret History of the World
Graduation to fourth density
Fulcanelli

Each item contains several links to other entries, suggestions for contextual reading, etc. The CassWiki should be your first priority to repeatedly consult in order to get acquainted with our common parlance.

As for The Work as such, have a look at this board to see whether there is something standing out that looks familiar. I would suggest (if I may) to try this topic as a short introduction: Alchemy.
Another good one would be: Gurdjieff: The Soul, The First Initiation and Christianity.

I'm sure others will eventually chime in with more suggestions and further answers.

Hope this helps a bit. :)

 

[grahamm]

Hi,

Thanks for your input. I was not even aware that there was a single reference in the book to 'higher beings' but I used the term because I think it describes the main subject area of the book, which is 'other realities', proof of them, what they are and how to access them (i.e. become a 'higher being'). I guess my idea is that a person who learns how to access these other realities becomes a 'higher being' in some way. The top link you provided summarizes the book and talks of two distinct races on earth - pre-adamic and adamic. Presumably one of these can be described as 'higher' than the other. But in terms of accessing this multi-dimensional reality, I think that Maria de Agreda provides a better example than any other human being who has lived. My point is that her life indicates clearly why and how she did what she did. Also, the implications of what she did in relation to Christianity are enormous. If you re-assess the book in the light of Maria de Agreda's life, what do you come up with? I think I know but others will have to get there themselves. I am simply trying to open a door.

As for my background - don't get me started! I'll never stop.

Graham

 

[grahamm]

PS How long do messages have to be approved by a moderator?

 

[gdpetti]

;) Of course, this dictation of the 'Virgin' by Maria might be more interesting, if this 'Virgin' actually existed as proclaimed by the Church... but that goes for this son of hers as well doesn't it? ;) The Church has proclaimed many things to be true or lies, when in fact, they are quite the opposite of something inbetween... that infamous grey zone of life.

Questioning one requires questioning the other, and then everything, including anything by 'higher beings'... as isn't that what the establishment in our world likes to think of themselves?
So, not just density but within our own dimension, there seem to be higher and lower units of consciousness... perhaps looking up PreAdamic and Adamic terms in your search might help as well?
At least it should be more confusing, but muddying the waters of thought is how the 'Work' always begins its journey, right?

It seems that what ends up being important or significant isn't the obvious 'special abilities' of someone, but what they do with what they've got... how well they play their 'hand', utilize their abilities.

 

[axj]

But in terms of accessing this multi-dimensional reality, I think that Maria de Agreda provides a better example than any other human being who has lived. My point is that her life indicates clearly why and how she did what she did.

Hi Graham,

Can you give us a short summary on what you think she did in practice to have these results?

 

[grahamm]

I think the most important thing is that she did not want to be a mystic or anything else; she had no thought for herself at all and was motivated by an utterly selfless love, both for God and man (you cannot have one without the other in my view). So - love, humility, selflessness, self-denial. The last three are really products of the first. In short, I think the lesson we learn from Maria de Agreda is that it is only through giving that we receive. And this love has to be absolutely genuine. But I have no doubt that it is love that gave Maria the power to do what she did. Love - it is as simple as that. I can take this further. Jesus Christ said 'I am the way, the truth and the life. No man cometh unto the Father, but by me.' What did he mean by this? Well, God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son. So Jesus is the embodiment (incarnation) of God's love for mankind. 'Coming to God through Jesus' therefore means coming to God through love of mankind. We must do what Christ did - give ourselves for humanity. 'God is love and he who abides in love abides in God and God abides in him.' When you think this through, I think you can understand how Maria thought of herself as utterly unworthy (she referred to herself as a 'vile wormlet' - not even a worm!) but, at the same time, she was the greatest Christian mystic of all time. You cannot become a great mystic by wanting to be one. I try to explain this in the paper I have written about her. God is love - literally, literally, literally. Sorry to rant! Anyway, these are my thoughts.

Here are the last lines of Dante's 'Inferno'. I think he understood.

'As the geometrician, who endeavours
To square the circle, and discovers not,
By taking thought, the principle he wants,

Even such was I at that new apparition;
I wished to see how the image to the circle
Conformed itself, and how it there finds place;

But my own wings were not enough for this,
Had it not been that then my mind there smote
A flash of lightning, wherein came its wish.

Here vigour failed the lofty fantasy:
But now was turning my desire and will,
Even as a wheel that equally is moved,
The Love which moves the sun and the other stars.'

The love which moves the sun... Literally.

 

[grahamm]

PS I forgot to say that it should be obvious that I don't think there is any such thing as a 'higher being'; we all have the potential to do what Maria de Agreda did. We are the 'higher beings'. And I don't regard this as mystical at all; it is as scientific as anything else (that is, the mechanics of things like bilocation can be explained by science).

 

[Woodsman]

I've known people who claimed to be able to jump across vast distances in space instantaneously, teleporting, among other things. I've seen some of this stuff. There's some reality to it, I think.

-It was couched in Eastern kung-fu philosophies and so-called, "energy work".

And from what I could tell, there was no hint of Christianity to be seen. Not even Buddhist philosophy. No easily quantifiable religion at all, really, though certainly a respect for the Creation.

From what I gather, people with such strange abilities are doing two things; for whatever reason, they were born with certain genetic features which enable access to such abilities. -And two, they sometimes work to hone these apparent 'powers'.

I think there might be some capacity for a regular person to switch on bits of DNA or otherwise access certain "extended features". But for most people, nearly all of them perhaps, it seems like a lot of pointless effort, a lot of pulling out of regular society, skipping out on relationships and regular life lessons, wandering around in Castanedan Mexican desert, if you will. -Which while fascinating lessons in and of themselves, which have served millions of readers in terms of sharing insight into the nature of reality through books, doesn't seem to me perhaps the best use of one's time on this planet, in this point in history, -not for most of us.

Laura described once a drunkard who had the ability to heal people with his touch, to close wounds. Neighbors, in order to save an injured person, had to drag him once out of a stupor in order to perform his trick. He didn't know how he did it. It just sort of happened. He was certainly not pious or any kind of model citizen. The conclusion being that one's clarity and purity of soul can have painfully little to do with apparent magical powers.

-Which is not to say that through working really hard on oneself and collecting knowledge, performing self-analysis, detoxing, eating a researched diet, etc., basically as we say here, "Cleaning one's Machine", such abilities might not crop up on their own as a direct consequence, as energy is freed up. I can see how perhaps jumping between Spain and the New World between two people in dream time, or through a kind of altered meditating state, or any number of other methods, might be within reach of the common person. -If not physically.

My opinion is that such -and more extravagant- abilities, in an ideal fail-safe universe would only become apparent at such a time when the person exhibiting them has worked out a good number of personality kinks, has become strong in terms of external consideration, and generally achieved mastery over their automatic selves. -At which point, the idea of such abilities would garner little or no excitement, or even heavy-heartedness because it represents another way to cause pain to oneself and others, a way to violate free will and important albeit, simple lessons which we all came here to learn.

There was one fellow on the forum a while back asking rather impatiently why people couldn't fly using esoteric knowledge, and where was that?? You know, like a super-hero?? -You could almost feel his frustration.

Thank heavens super-powers aren't available on this globe except in the rarest of cases. As a race, we can barely even deal with penises and vaginas, let alone levers and fire, without making a complete hash of things.

 

[grahamm]

Thanks for your input. I don't claim to have all the answers or to be able to explain every instance. I merely looked at two examples (Maria de Agreda and Padre Pio) and tried to work out what had enabled them to do what they did. I am convinced that Maris de Agreds did what she (and others) attested to. Beyond that one is just left with trying to make a stab at some sort of explanation. Perhaps they are all space lizards! But seriously, there is something about what might be called purity of heart which seems to lie behind these sorts of phenomena. I wouldn't claim that a person has to be explicitly Christian but, as I said, I think if a person who abides in love abides in God - whether they are aware of it or not. As for the drunken healer, even he might well have had an overwhelming love of mankind. Certainly, one of the greatest Christian saints, Saint Francis of Assisi, was a very wild youth (and he is another one who is said to have bilocated). Anyway, I just thought the case of Maria de Agreda might stir some thinking or searching in a new direction. What worries me is that people try to analyze too much, whereas, it seems to me, the exact opposite is required. It would be a pity to spend one's life searching for something that is already inside you. As Beulah Mullen Karney says in her book 'Maria de Agreda': 'The way to do is to be.' That's my ha'penny worth.

 

[Woodsman]

Thanks for your input. I don't claim to have all the answers or to be able to explain every instance. I merely looked at two examples (Maria de Agreda and Padre Pio) and tried to work out what had enabled them to do what they did. I am convinced that Maris de Agreds did what she (and others) attested to. Beyond that one is just left with trying to make a stab at some sort of explanation. Perhaps they are all space lizards! But seriously, there is something about what might be called purity of heart which seems to lie behind these sorts of phenomena. I wouldn't claim that a person has to be explicitly Christian but, as I said, I think if a person who abides in love abides in God - whether they are aware of it or not. As for the drunken healer, even he might well have had an overwhelming love of mankind. Certainly, one of the greatest Christian saints, Saint Francis of Assisi, was a very wild youth (and he is another one who is said to have bilocated). Anyway, I just thought the case of Maria de Agreda might stir some thinking or searching in a new direction. What worries me is that people try to analyze too much, whereas, it seems to me, the exact opposite is required. It would be a pity to spend one's life searching for something that is already inside you. As Beulah Mullen Karney says in her book 'Maria de Agreda': 'The way to do is to be.' That's my ha'penny worth.

Deep analysis is sort of the raison d'etre around these parts. -And it has garnered many benefits over the years; has earned an excellent track record.

There is certainly something to be said for tapping into instinct and getting in the 'zone', but how do we know this? Deep analysis!

What has been discovered is that only by working the brain hard, seeking and incorporating Knowledge, do new synaptic pathways develop, increasing perceptive strength and thus opening up new possibilities. I am regularly amazed when I think I'm done, when I think I know all about some subject or other, that a forum member will bring to bear new discoveries which require some disassembly and tweaking, -or in some cases, a total tear-down of old belief structures which are demonstrated to no longer fit with Objective Reality. -New insights which allow people to take things to the next level.

Heating and cooling, adding energy and then crystalizing. This is, I think, the truth behind Alchemy. Turning the leaden soul into a bright material through repeated refinement exercises. This is the "Work", the true stairway to Heaven, to use that metaphor.

 

[Alada]

I guess my idea is that a person who learns how to access these other realities becomes a 'higher being' in some way.

If you follow some of the links provided earlier (and in Secret History), you'll find many quotes and information from Gurdjieff on the subject of Being. For example, from 'In Search of the Miraculous' there is this:

What worries me is that people try to analyze too much, whereas, it seems to me, the exact opposite is required. It would be a pity to spend one's life searching for something that is already inside you.

I disagree, see above. I think a very great deal of analysis is required if we are to make any progress and have a chance to improve our level of Being. In order to become what we are, first we must come out of what we are not. And for that a great deal of self study, feedback and analysis is needed I think. Otherwise we can spend our whole life only indulging in wishful thinking and imagination and end it having achieved no change in Being at all. All the while imagining that we have. There may indeed already be something there inside us, the question then is how do we get to it, or, what is it which prevents us from being able to access it?

[quote author=Gurdjieff – In Search of the Miraculous]
"But there are a thousand things which prevent a man from awakening, which keep him in the power of his dreams. In order to act consciously with the intention of awakening, it is necessary to know the nature of the forces which keep man in a state of sleep.

"First of all it must be realized that the sleep in which man exists is not normal but hypnotic sleep. Man is hypnotized and this hypnotic state is continually maintained and strengthened in him. One would think that there are forces for whom it is useful and profitable to keep man in a hypnotic state and prevent him from seeing the truth and understanding his position.

"There is an Eastern tale which speaks about a very rich magician who had a great many sheep. But at the same time this magician was very mean. He did not want to hire shepherds, nor did he want to erect a fence about the pasture where his sheep were grazing. The sheep consequently often wandered into the forest, fell into ravines, and so on, and above all they ran away, for they knew that the magician wanted their flesh and skins and this they did not like.

"At last the magician found a remedy. He hypnotized his sheep and suggested to them first of all that they were immortal and that no harm was being done to them when they were skinned, that, on the contrary, it would be very good for them and even pleasant; secondly he suggested that the magician was a good master who loved his flock so much that he was ready to do anything in the world for them; and in the third place he suggested to them that if anything at all were going to happen to them it was not going to happen just then, at any rate not that day, and therefore they had no need to think about it. Further the magician suggested to his sheep that they were not sheep at all; to some of them he suggested that they were lions, to others that they were eagles, to others that they were men, and to others that they were magicians.

"And after this all his cares and worries about the sheep came to an end. They never ran away again but quietly awaited the time when the magician would require their flesh and skins.

"This tale is a very good illustration of man's position.[/quote]

 

[know_yourself_1234]

[quote author=Gurdjieff – In Search of the Miraculous]
"There are," he said, "two lines along which man's development proceeds, the line of knowledge and the line of being. In right evolution the line of knowledge and the line of being develop simultaneously, parallel to, and helping one another. But if the line of knowledge gets too far ahead of the line of being, or if the line of being gets ahead of the line of knowledge, man's development goes wrong, and sooner or later it must come to a standstill.

[/quote]

Maybe it explains about the idea of the secluded hermit living in its cave, because he is not of "part of the world" (the objective looking of a "man of knowledge")?

I understand it as that a higher being would rather appear with a solid state of being, more in a sense of being a higher normal person (because if there is life on earth, there should be kind of a basic working model for growing and prospering in it) because of a higher standard of objectivity.

Thus, such a person would share its being with other people, because he would never been able to reach this state without them, so being naturally occurs midst of people.

I would love to stay in my bubble, but after some time I naturally feel the need of reaching other selves, to share stuff, what I find is worth in life, without fear, just in the manner of being myself.

Not knowing if this is relevant; I just wanted to post