AwakenedQary L Stezvart

AWAKENEDATTITUDE

Aw aken ed ATTITUDE

Gary L Stew art

ORDER OF THE MILITIA CRUCIFERA EVANGELICA

© Gary L Stewart 1984-89. All rights reserved.

Published 1997 by The Order of the Militia Crucifera Evangelica

No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without

the written permission of the publisher.

For information on obtaining permission for reprints and excerpts,

please contact:OMCE

PO Box 226323 Dallas, TX 75222-6323

USA

Printed and bound in Singapore.

Contents

Foreword vii

Introduction and Dedication ix

E s s a y s

The Quest to Know 2

A Prerequisite to Mysticism 5

Is Mysticism Logical? 9

The Infinite 13

Open-Mindedness 17

Spiritual Attainment 22

Desire 26

The Movement Toward Enlightenment 31

Determining Rosicrucian Affiliation 35

The Mission of theConfraternity of the Rose Cross 40

vi Contents

Laws of the Rose Cross 45

The Value of Tradition 50

Perspective:The Importance of Versatility 54

Do the Ends Justify the Means? 63

Legend 67

Concepts Regarding Reincarnation 71

Our Purpose Is Service 76

How Do We Truly Serve? 79

Awakened Attitude 85

About the Author 88

Foreword

O n e of the most important keys to the treasures of the Cosmic is an Awakened Attitude. Time and time again this has been proved an essential truth. It is outside politics or dogmatizing religion.

So m any leading individuals in the past, and in our present time, became great because they had developed their ability to gain access to the hidden wealth of the Creator by altering their perspective to the environment as they experienced it: An awakened attitude.

One has only to read W ordsworth's "Daffodils" to experience something of the sheer wonder that he felt w hen he perceived that great panorama of vibrant life in nature's grand display. Blake is such another and it is doubtful whether anyone can sit in a concert hall and remain unmoved by the singing of "Jerusalem." Another name comes to mind, Benjamin Franklin, He was one of the em inent thinkers of his time and had a great influence on the development of the United States of America.

In our own time I feel that Dolores Ashcroft-Norwicki, Director of Studies of the Servants of the Light has an ex traord inarily awakened attitude and the gift of exhorting others to follow her example. Gareth Knight is another contem porary teacher w ho also has the genius of training students to develop their inner potential. My Wife, Elizabeth Anderton Fox, and colleague in the organisation of Sirius, now also Magister Templi of the O.M.C.E. has the gift and I have w itnessed m any examples of her brilliance w ith an awakened attitude. The list is long and the above are only a few of the nam es that come to mind.

Finally, one of The Greats of our time is without doubt Gary L Stewart, Knight Commander of the Order of the Militia Crucifera Evangelica, and Sovereign Grand M aster of the British Martinist Order, the author of this work. He has developed an awakened attitude to a very high degree. One has only to be in his company for a short while to sense something of the magnificence of the Great Inner Light, The Light of the Cosmic Mind. He is without doubt an excellent example of one with an awakened attitude. I feel that this work of his will become a treasure to m any and encourage them to live by his example.

John AB Fox Commander of Knights

UK Priory OMCE

Introduction and Dedication

T h is series of essays was w ritten between the years 1984 and 1989.1 think, at the time, some very crucial points in several of the essays were entirely missed by m any readers. However, one cannot be blamed if a point was missed because in some ways, I suppose, my writing could be viewed as being unfair, as I have purposefully never defined my perspective in a clear and distinct fashion. Subsequently, I am guilty, in a sense, of writing in those “parables" inherent w ithin those of “mystical" propensity.

Yet, there is a reason for this. I very strongly believe that we are here, manifest upon this plane of existence, not only to discover, but to create. In order to accomplish such objectives w e m ust first learn to appreciate all of our resources. However, before we can appreciate them, we m ust first know what they are. To discover w hat they may be, it is essential to develop a particular perspective—one that can clearly see the obvious.

This sounds very simple and indeed is very simple, so why can't we see it that way? W hy is it that we, as hum an beings insist upon taking that which is simple and turning it into something which is impossible to understand?

As an illustration of what I mean, I will refer to those people who pursue the path of mysticism as well as those people who choose a course of orthodox religious belief. The former, regardless of how it is defined, ultimately seek to experience "Cosmic Consciousness," the state of ultim ate enlightenm ent. Those people of the latter category generally seek to know God. At least some do whereas others are content with faith. The key to understanding our problems in our respective quests has to do w ith our search, our desire, to attain

our goals. We only desire and subsequently seek that which we have convinced ourselves that we do not have.

First of all, we would have to realize that before we could seek something we would need to have an idea that that which we sought actually existed. It is here that many of the "mistakes" of the quest are made. Often, the mystic would first begin to define enlighten­m ent and the religionist to define God. Suddenly, the task becomes so m uch simpler—or so it is thought—"We merely have to attain that which we have defined!"

No wonder there are so many different religious beliefs or defini­tions of Cosmic Consciousness. W hat is worse in extreme cases— consider w hat happens if someone actually attains their definition. The rest of us w ho are still seeking are suddenly the recipients of a barrage of "answers" which does little more than to confuse or cloud the issue, especially if we have a propensity not to discriminate or, most importantly, not to rely upon ourselves for discovery of Truth.

The point is, that hum ans have a tendency to w ant to complicate issues. I am rem inded of the logical proof of the existence of God put forth by the medieval theologian and philosopher Saint Anselm. According to his “proof" in the Proslogion, God was defined as that which nothing greater can be thought. W hat does that tell us? Not a lot, but it certainly had people hopping around debating the issue for a long time. In the process of debating, many apparently forgot w hat it was that they were seeking.

One of my most favorite and frequent quotes is by Benedict Spinoza. As he writes at the conclusion of his book, The Ethics,

If the way which I have pointed out as leading to this result seems exceedingly hard, it may nevertheless be discovered. Needs must it be hard, since it is so seldom found. How would it be possible, if salvation were ready to our hand, and could without great labor be found, that it should be by almost all men neglected? But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare.

I think he makes a very good point. He observes an apparently predom inant hum an attitude which causes us to concentrate our

efforts upon understanding and discovery of the complex. He also points out that if our ultimate concern, that being salvation, were so readily and easily available to us, most people would neglect it and seek it in a more exclusive fashion. Indeed, we know it exists. That is w hy we look for it. However, do we actually seek it or our opinion of it?

In our examples of God, salvation, or enlightenment, we somehow have to accept their existence—unless we are of the nature of the cynic w ho would begin arguing prior to embarking upon the quest. So why do we define that existence before understanding what it is? It is my opinion that it is because we are either uncertain of how to proceed or that we choose not to listen to the Silence and wait for the inspiration of the process.

Teachers m ust know several things before teaching. First, they m ust understand hum an nature in general; second, they m ust know the nature of the individual who is to be taught; third, they must realize that they, themselves, cannot teach but can only assist to inspire the student to learn; and fourth, all knowledge of the Great Art is simple and obvious and regardless of intelligence or education, it can be mastered by all. To attain, we must learn to accept, not to take and not to have, but to give. Simply accept that which is before us as it is freely given—but do not try to possess it.

I am very careful of my use of the word "obvious." In fact you will very seldom see it in my writings or hear it in my speech. The reason for this is that what may be obvious to me may not be obvious to someone else—and vice versa. Subsequently, if the word is used indiscriminately, it can offend others. However, it m ust be noted that each elem ent of the quest—be it for personal attainm ent or the application of that attainm ent—is not only simple, but is obvious in its simplicity. Perhaps that is w hy m any people w ho understand hum an nature either choose to issue their "teachings" in a complic­ated m anner or in the form of parables. In the former instance, it is hoped that by proving a point utilizing the methods of those being taught, they will suddenly realize that after all is said and done, it was already simple to begin with. The latter instance is a method

most commonly used by mystics to assist those involved in mystical pursuits. Here, the attempt is to invoke the intuitive process and to inspire the reliance upon one's self for the answer. Perhaps, in such an instance, without understanding, the student perceives a puzzle. But the "teacher" knows that w hen the puzzle is solved, the “student" forcefully understands that they attained as a result of their own awakening. The only thing the "teacher" really did was to guide the student to the proper attitude necessary to realize.

Indeed, it is only a m atter of how we choose to look at things. Ultimately, who decides that? Such be the discovery.

Then, comes creation, or, our ability and responsibility to manifest w hat we know. This is the real Work, the real Service needed in mysticism. The mystic knows that they should only do that which is needful and no more. The key to wisdom is learning the difference between needs and wants.

Often, someone who is perceived to be a great mystic is expected to perform dem onstrations or miracles by those w ho adm ire or denounce. In either case, is the perspective of the "Mystic” respected? Is there any need for such demonstrations? Or is it that both the adm irer and cynic simply want to be convinced or entertained? Can it be effectively argued that if one has the ability to heal, it is that one individual's responsibility to heal all of the ills of the world? Perhaps w ithout knowing it, the reports or demands of the admirer and cynic are indeed fulfilled. The true art of healing has to do w ith the inspiring of learning. If we were given everything, what would motivate us to do anything other than to take?

As stated earlier, I have never really defined my perspective. Not that it is unique because anyone who writes or communicates faces the same situation, but it might be appropriate to attempt to explain it in order to illustrate the concept of need.

Having been in the position where I was expected to perform "mystical demonstrations," and in fact have been asked on more than one occasion to do so, in each instance I complied in the purest way that I knew how. I simply was as I w as—allowing life to be the illus­trator of the highest mystical principle conceivable by living things.

Sadly enough, the point was missed because something else was expected—generally a desire to witness a "supernatural" or psychic feat of some sort. W hat can be more mystical than life itself? Or why attem pt to prove the existence of God w hen all we have to do is to look around us?

At o ther tim es I have been asked to dem onstrate a psychic ab ility—w hich it m ust be understood is distinct from mystical "ability." To this I usually comply by demonstrating telekinetic activity. I simply raised my arm. Again, the point of the demonstration was usually missed. Consider that my physical body is a temporary vehicle of the "Essence." The mind is a tool of that essence. In that the mind and its process are intangible, whereas the body is tangible, the result of the m ind acting upon the body is telekinesis.

However, admittedly, I knew what was expected in these instances and from that perspective I was guilty of avoiding the issue. Even though my point may have been missed, was the message wasted?

I attem pt to govern my life based upon the principle of needs in the act of Service. It is not my particular purpose to pursue the development of psychic abilities, but for others, it may well be. It is not my place to offer an opinion in this regard. However, it should be noted that it is important to be not only capable, but proficient in effectively manifesting in psychic realms. After all, is such not a part of life? This realm, too, like mysticism, is much simpler than we make it out to be. My only comment is that I have yet to discover any need to demonstrate the obvious.

Again, w hat is obvious? Recently in a private discussion w ith a friend, I used the illustration that I could teach him to physically touch a star. In the world of science, such a desire is great and whole technologies are built around this subject, but for those who try keep things simple, such ability is also simple. Does not the light which originated from a star touch the retina of our eyes thereby allowing us to see it? Have we not then touched a star? In illustrating this example within psychic realms, projection can be accomplished the same way.

W hy is it that we perceive life to be so complicated? Why is it

that our quest, being so simple and obvious, is made difficult by our attitudes? Indeed, the enemies of Light, of ourselves, and the source of all fears are truly of our own making. Why be proponents of the "unmaking" w hen our purpose is to create?

I stated earlier that I purposefully have kept my perspective undefined. There are many reasons w hy I did this. The Tradition to which I belong emphasizes this technique so that discovery may be appreciated. It has taken me ten years to appreciate the simple nature of the Art—many times to my "Teacher's" frustration I would think— and, an additional ten years to work with the Creative Forces of which there is much yet to learn. M any aspects of that learning, of that experience have been veiled in the essays written between 1984 and 1989. To see them, one must work on the development of a particular attitude w ithin one's self which is the inspiration for the title of this collection. Indeed, it is the purpose of our Quest.

To all those who are sincere, either manifest or unmanifest, is this book dedicated and given in Love.

GLSSan Jose, California

June 25, 1991

ESSAYS

The Quest to Know

A proper definition of mysticism, w hether it be from a standard created in today's world or that of previous centuries, has always been elusive and vague. A technical definition from the Oxford English Dictionary assists in such an opinion w hen it states: "The opinions, mental tendencies, or habits of thought and feeling, characteristic of mystics; mystical doctrines or spirit; belief in the possibility of union with the Divine nature by means of ecstatic contemplation; reliance on spiritual intuition or exalted feeling as the means of acquiring knowledge of mysteries inaccessible to intellectual apprehension." Subsequently, mysticism is often labeled as the "irrational philosophy" in that it is thought that the intellect cannot comprehend such enlightenment. Furthermore, the irrational implies self-delusion and dreamy confusion of thought.

It was not too many years ago that "intellectual giants” thought it irrational to believe in gravity or a heliocentric conception of the universe and, more recently, in plate-tectonics or a myriad of other currently rational existences. Even in our present day, there is much debate among physicists as to whether string theory offers science an enlightened alternative to quantum mechanics. Simply, quantum m echanics or particle physics bases its prem ise on a Newtonian concept of the universe which assigns values to "points" in time and space. String theorists ascribe a different value whereby the “points" actually become tiny "strings." In particle physics there is a quest to unify three forces in nature. Unfortunately, there are four known forces, and it is the string theorists who include gravity in their unification attempts, as they are able to look at the universe from a different and not-so-limited perspective.

The Quest to Know 3

However, our point is not to identify with the particulars of an ever-changing intellectual comprehension of the universe or whatever it is that is being sought, but rather w ith the act of seeking. And with that act comes a different definition of mysticism; that being a term applied to philosophical or scientific theories of which no rational account can be given at the present time.

It is from a nonscientific contemporary community that another perspective of mysticism has developed. This comm unity is often referred to as participants in the "New Age"—an age of enlightenment where there is a transformation of hum an consciousness whereby the utopian ideals will eventually manifest. These are noble concepts indeed. However, we are mistaken if we think that they are new to our era. Such goals have been the concern of hum anity for ages.

Yet, today, we may read books; attend lectures, seminars, or retreats; or practice a variety of “disciplines* to attain enlightenment. We m ay follow popular fads or believe popular beliefs, but what is accomplished? Only w hat you do—only what you experience or what you decide. To convince potential followers to practice their system, many offer promises of enlightenment or the development of special powers. Support for their cause is sometimes given by citing a super­natural source. This source often manifests as a coming messiah, a channeled entity, or a M aster personality of great attainm ent who allegedly works through one person not perceived by anyone else unless they have such great faith that they, too, share in the created reality. Many define this as mysticism. Rosicrucians define it as fantasy.

So, then, what is mysticism? Is it the irrational philosophy? Or is it a mysterious, supernatural, or psychic belief?

W hat the scientist, the advocate of the New Age, the philosopher, and the theologians regardless of their diverging beliefs share in common is the quest to know what there is to be known. So, too, is the objective of the mystic. In fact, is it not true that such a quest is the objective of all hum an beings, in one m anner or another? Subsequently, when we consider such disciplines as science, philosophy, or mysticism, we need to recognize them for w hat they are simply, methodologies to obtain an objective.

Very few people in today's world would consider science to be w eird or mysterious. However, mysticism is sometimes categorized as such because it is often related to things psychic, occult, magical, or supernatural. Often one brings to mind images such as crystal balls and fortune telling.

Yet, mysticism is none of that. It is simply an art of knowing. Misconceptions develop from a misunderstanding of the technique and the mystical experience as described by those who have actually had such an experience. The reason for this is that the mystical experi­ence is an experience of a transcending nature, and often the mind will enter a reality where most people will not have the words to describe the experience. As a result, it will be labeled as "irrational" but not by the participant. The mystic would consider the experience about as irrational as beauty or love, harmony and peace.

The art of m ysticism is the developm ent of a technique to personally know the source of all Being. Many call this source God; others, the Cosmic; maybe some, the Grand Unified Theory—the point being that the experience is noetic. We know, not think we know or develop a faith or belief, but w e know. Knowledge is rational.

The experience is even more beautiful because the potential for knowing exists in all human beings. The experience of enlightenment is not a nebulous something which is separate from the self. It is present everywhere, and the process of enlightenment is nothing more than an evolved realization.

A Prerequisite to Mysticism

W h e n the sincere student of mystical philosophy has studied this subject for some time, he or she often begins to realize that many variables are associated with the philo­sophical aspects of mysticism. These variables are quite diversified in their nature and can become intricate and involved w hen used to explain a mystical state of consciousness. This can create frustration for the student since one innately feels that mysticism itself is quite simple. However, paradoxically, explanations of mysticism are intricate in detail and often confusing to say the least. This point becomes apparent w hen the student continually studies the subject from, let us say, an intellectual perspective.

It is widely recognized that mysticism is difficult to understand on a philosophical basis. If one approaches the subject from a purely empirical and non-mystical point of view, mysticism is considered to be vague at best, and incomprehensible at the least. If the subject is approached by one w ho is inclined toward the sensational or mysterious, mysticism can be elusive. It is this latter tendency which, unfortunately, lends to the incomprehensibility of mysticism since the subject is often conveyed in flowery and vague language that does not adequately, and simply, express what is attempted to be conveyed.

The understanding and expression of mysticism should be as simple as the actual state of realizing the mystical experience. A com­mon ground that most mystics agree upon is that the experience is the ultimate in simplicity. There is a definite clarity of knowing without doubts, and w ith that clarity comes a very simple understanding of a very simple subject. The simplicity lies in the realization of a oneness

or of an all-pervading essence infusing all things. So, why is the under­standing and expression of the experience complex and confusing?

This question may be answered by analyzing and unifying two avenues of approach. First, let us disregard any sensational and m ysterious aspects of the subject by elim inating them as being unproductive and, therefore, worthless. This will leave us with only a serious and sincere attitude of inquiry.

What happens is that w hen the serious and sincere student has studied mysticism for a period of time, he or she soon realizes that a wide diversity of material must necessarily be reviewed and digested. In other words, it becomes apparent that a complex philosophical system has been developed. This system is an extension, or a result, of our own thoughts that have evolved from merely asking w hy and wanting proof of how we can be sure that what we think is correct.

As our studies continue, we find ourselves asking more questions due to the increasing amount of knowledge acquired. This increased knowledge then incites our thoughts to expand upon an analysis of a complex nature. W ith the analysis comes m ore intricacy and complexity. At this point, if we are not careful, we can get caught up in a never-ending circle which becomes more and more complex.

Second, we soon discover that if we want to persist in our studies, patience m ust be developed. It becomes apparent that the deeper we go into mystical studies, the more time is needed to assess our acquisition of knowledge. Quite frequently an obstacle is created when we impatiently begin to think that we w ant all the answers at this very m om ent in time. At this point, we have the option to continue or to give up. Through the unification of the two points— that is, through the combination of the complexity developed as a result of our thought process, and the realization that persistence and patience are required for coherency—we find that mysticism has already taught us an important lesson: simply, that such a unification is necessary.

After we gain such a realization, then, we discover that serious and sincere students actually already had an innate propensity toward mystical studies inherent w ithin their beings, and a conscious effort

to study has merely brought this inclination to the surface. When this happens, the student realizes that w hat was once thought to be complex really is not, and w hen this point is understood, it is realized as being quite simple. This may appear to be self-evident, but it is a crucial point. This clarity of realization, sometimes called the "aha" experience, is often intuitive in nature, not intellectual.

Invariably, at this time, the student will re-evaluate the complexities that have been encountered and then attempt to reorganize them into a more simplified pattern. Perhaps the question is then asked: ‘W hat is the foundation from which my thoughts have evolved?" Naturally, all students m ust answer this question for themselves simply because each individual must decide what is important and to be included in the development of their own personal philosophy.

As far as Rosicrucianism is concerned, we are a school that teaches mysticism and our system has a simple and solid foundation. The core of our understanding of mysticism lies in our ontology, or science of being. W hen students of their own accord turn their attention to this area, they are essentially beginning to ask themselves deep and meaningful questions. Essentially, they are asking questions and are challenging the very core of mystical thought. The answers that they find as a result of their own rational or mystical processes will deter­m ine their own particular approach and attitude toward attainment.

At this point, clarity of perspective is essential. That is, one must be able to differentiate between one's own thoughts and aspirations developed from within and those of others acquired from discussion and reading. Once we can make this differentiation, we often discover a natural attunem ent between ourselves and the essence of mystical philosophy that results in a deeper com prehension than we had before. This attainm ent can be called mystical in nature, and our perspective adjusts accordingly.

We then discover, when reflecting upon our development, that we had begun our studies from the perspective that was most readily accessible and common to us. That is, we commenced with an intel­lectual study of mysticism, a topic that we felt innately within us. As a result, we developed a mystical philosophy which, by its own nature,

raised more questions than answers. We then found that there appeared to be a limit to our understanding based upon our method of approach. But if we persisted w ith sincerity, seriousness, and patience, the innate qualities of our mystical philosophy became clear and distinct, and if we thought about it, we would discover that our intuitive faculties had developed as a result of our efforts. This process of intuition then becomes a major source of acquiring knowledge, and it actually enables us to expand our realization capabilities beyond the limitations of our intellectual thoughts.

Is Mysticism Logical?

O n e of the m any popular m is­conceptions concerning mysticism claims that since the mystical experience is an inner experience, it cannot be logical. That is, mysticism is irrational and has no place in our "rational” society. This means that if an individual has a mystical experience, he or she would be unable to understand that experience on an intellectual level and would therefore be unable to communicate that experience to another person. If true, we could state that there is no logic to mysticism.

To further com pound our difficulties in understanding true mysticism, our society has produced many organizations that profess to be mystical schools and whose leaders jum p on the platform expounding a hodgepodge of alleged mystical doctrines, thereby creating what we may term a "mystical circus." It is here that many "seekers" go and pay to be entertained.

It is imperative that we first realize that mysticism is simply a doctrine that states that knowledge of the omnipotent Oneness may be acquired through a direct experience. The mystical experience, then, is an individual knowing of the Essence, Source, or God. As a result, mysticism is concerned only with Ontology [the study of the nature of Being). It does not deal with astral projection, telepathy, or any other form of psychic experience. It m ust be clear that such psychic experiences are merely tools which may be used by an individual to attain a mystical state of consciousness. In other words, there is a distinct difference between mystical and psychic experiences.

The path that an individual may take to acquire a mystical understanding varies according to choice. It is not necessary that one possess psychic abilities or have a high degree of intellectual

understanding. Each individual may choose a path that is in accord­ance with their personality, and depending upon the individual's seriousness and sincerity of motive, he or she will be successful in attaining the goal.

Let us consider this point by first illustrating a methodology different from the Rosicrucian perspective, that is, a consideration of the four major schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The goal of all four schools is simply the enlightenment of all humanity. The path toward attainm ent of that goal is twofold—the Sutric and Tantric methods. Each school will use one or the other, and sometimes both methods. The Sutric method is, generally, a study of the written philosophy and is essentially an intellectual system. On the other hand, the Tantric method is the path of experience, where an inner wisdom is cultivated and applied practically to our lives. The point that should be considered is that both methods, if sincerely and responsibly applied, can lead to attainment.

From a Rosicrucian perspective, we possess a system of study which combines the two methods. Our teachings are written in m ono­graph form and are designed to be practically applied to our lives through experience and knowing that w hat we are studying works. However, we, as individuals, m ust apply what we read. Otherwise, we are doing nothing more than wasting our time.

By illustrating the two perspectives, we can see much similarity in both m ethodologies used and results attained. However, the systems vary in an important and subtle way. Rosicrucianism is a Western m ethod designed for the Western tem peram ent, whereas Tibetan Buddhism is designed for the Eastern mind. The Eastern path, as exemplified by Tibetan Buddhism, is extremely difficult, complex, and especially alien to the Western tem peram ent. For the Westerner, unless extreme precision and discrimination is practiced by the adherent, it is very easy to digress on a dangerous tangent without even realizing it. Such is further exemplified by the Western preoccupation w ith the sensational entertainm ent of "strange and far away places"

On the other hand, the Rosicrucian path also presents its dangers

if one has a preoccupation with the sensational. However, since the methodology is more familiar to the Western way of thinking, we are not as easily fooled by various temptations. Both "true'' schools place an emphasis on a well-rounded understanding, but the depar­ture point on the Rosicrucian path emphasizes the development of a rational, objective logic of proof of the mystical .experience, and we approach the ultimate end by having this aspect ever apparent in our lives. This is not to say that the Eastern path does not also do the same, but since the two social and cultural structures are different, there is a subtle difference as to w here the emphasis is placed.

To further elaborate on the "common” definition of mysticism, it is stated that a mystical experience is the result of "vague" thinking. In other words, there is no logic behind it. We are then led to believe that mysticism is a deviation of the accepted norm and is, therefore, unreliable as a source of knowledge. How untrue that statement is to the mystic! The very foundation of the mystical experience is in kncwijig. There are no doubts and there is no deception. W hat is perhaps irrational to the non-mystic is very rational to the mystic.

It is unfortunate that many diverse schools of thought tend to confine logic to a limited framework of communication. That is, logic is a means of communicating an idea to others that can be object­ively understood. Naturally, such communication neces-sitates that all parties concerned have a common denom inator that is related. Does this necessarily mean, then, that predicate calculus is illogical if communicated to someone with a first-grade education? In the same manner, is mysticism illogical if a mystical experience is related to someone who has never had such an experience? Two brief examples can, perhaps, illustrate this point.

Recently, in San Jose, California, a series of lectures was given by a fundamentalist Christian who also happened to be a lawyer possessing an excellent ability to apply logic to justify her contentions. The inten­tion of her lectures was to expose those individuals and organizations who taught mysticism as being workers and followers of Satan. Naturally, Rosicrucianism and two or three other legitimate schools were included in the attacks. So, too, were many schools of "sensational

mystical fantasy," one in particular to which the lecturer confined most of her comments and on which her logical arguments were built. After a basic premise was established, all mysticism was lumped into one preconceived definition, and then logically tw isted to conform to a specific purpose. Most of the attendees of the lecture agreed with the basic premise, and therefore unequivocally accepted the conclusions. However, those who knew otherwise easily saw the fallacy in the logic.

On a more positive note, in our second example, we can ask if love is logical. If two people experience love, then indeed a system of logic is communicated and understood. But, if a person w ho felt love tried to explain love to an individual who had never experienced it, that person lacking the experience could argue that love was illogical and irrational.

W hen we understand the relative values of logic and realize that logic itself is a tool of communicating knowledge, then we can easily see that there is a logic to mysticism and that it is rational since the very path of mysticism is the path of knowing.

The Infinite

I f we w ere to consolidate the essence of mystical philosophy into one specific point which all students of mysticism could use as a foundation for gaining under­standing, what would it be? Could it possibly be the steps required to develop psychically? Or, a systematic overview of the thought process? O r ... ad infinitum?

That is precisely the point w hen we say "ad infinitum." Can we truly say that there is, indeed, one essential foundation from which all students must begin? If we did, there would always be someone who would disagree, primarily because each individual has a unique perspective based upon their own experiences and what is important to one is irrelevant to the other. We on the Rosierucian Path cannot precisely say that we teach but, rather, that we assist one to learn for oneself. We are quite cognizant of the fact that all learning m ust necessarily come from within each individual student and, therefore, cannot be ascertained by the student from without. Any school of thought or philosophy, any definition of terms, m ust be individually interpreted by the student and applied to life in his own unique way. Only then can true learning take place.

Regardless of what is understood by the student or how he or she interprets a thought, there do exist certain subjects that the student m ust consider. Rosicrucianism often delves into subjects that can be relegated to the category of "mystical speculation," but regardless of whether they are mere speculations or not, at some point in time the student m ust arrive at an interpretation of them so as to continue to acquire a more complete understanding. Essentially, the “true" understanding m ust supersede the intellectual. That is, it must

be developed from the innate qualities w ithin one's being. It may be "sparked" from without, but it must be understood from within.

One such subject that each student eventually tries to come to terms with is infinity. Simply defined, infinity is that which is without beginning or end. That, in itself, is easy enough to comprehend, but how m any of us have asked ourselves, "But where did it all start?" At the same time, many of us are looking for the absolute truth or the final realization. Before we can answer such questions, we need to come to some realization as to the nature of that which is infinite.

There are several ways to approach the subject, the most common being from a linear perspective. That is from a perspective that is really intellectual in nature. As an example of this, everyone who has studied mathematics is aware that between two points on a line segment there exists an "infinite" number of additional points. We can conceive of a situation where such an existence is possible because we can visualize that between two points, there can always exist a middle point between the two. To illustrate this contention, if we refer to the paradoxes of the ancient Greek philosopher Zeno, we will find one or two examples that may give us a very good explanation of an extremely profound concept.

First, Zeno illustrates a race in which one of the participants is given a head start. He then asks the question, "Who will w in the race?" Zeno concludes, essentially, that neither participant could logically win because for the second person to catch up with the other, he would first have to travel half the distance. But, before he could travel half the distance, he would also have to travel half that distance a situation which conceivably necessitates an infinite process where neither par­ticipant could noticeably move, let alone win a race. This notion, Zeno concludes, is absurd because in actuality people win and lose races.

In another of Zeno's paradoxes, he cites an example of a person shooting an arrow in the air. He points out that at any given moment in time, the arrow cannot possibly move. Again, he concludes, this notion is absurd.

The implication that Zeno is making in the above illustrations is that our notions of what we perceive to be the nature of that which

The Quest to Know 15

is infinite, and that which constitutes time and space, are actually much more than w hat is normally intellectually perceived. And, indeed, there is certainly the implication that w hat constitutes our reality is only a limited expression of an understanding of what really exists that is limited by our perspective of how we observe the world.

Since the time of Zeno, the history of science and philosophy has been essentially limited to the linear perspective of infinity. It was not until the evolution of mathematics allowed for such great minds, as exemplified by Albert Einstein, to evolve a different perspective of reality, that the ontological concerns of mysticism really began to be understood. Naturally, the theory of relativity brought a different perspective to how hum anity viewed our world.

As an example, within the past ten years, a revolutionary new theory called "Super-Gravity" challenges our concept of linear infinity. Very simply, this theory calls for a unification of the laws of gravity in which seemingly two distinctive laws are unified into one. The implication here is that there exists a unifying factor in the universe that, mystically, can be described as an all-pervading Oneness. However, this "new" theory also calls for the subdivision of subatomic particles, such as neutrons, photons, muons, gluons, so-ons and so-ons ... which is essentially a return to the "linear" m anner of thinking.

The point of the m atter is that we recognize the existence of something that is understood to be "beyond" our comprehension, yet we attempt to describe it by utilizing our accepted standards of defini­tion. As a result, we often run into many paradoxes and contradictions that are really unnecessary.

Mystical philosophy, on the other hand, allows for “new" inter­pretations of the “old" scientific and philosophical contentions in that we try not to limit our m ethod of thinking. Instead, we incorporate a change of attitude and perspective into our belief system. In other words, we examine all possible angles to any given problem and incorporate such hum an attributes as intuition and insight into our system of study.

If we apply the methodology or logic that results from mysticism, we can view and understand the subject of infinity in a different light.

Instead of considering it from a linear or quantative expression, let us view it from a qualitative angle in which the quantitative interpretation of that which is infinite merely becomes a "part" of the greater whole. In other words, the all-pervading essence referred to in mystical writings is not described or defined as being infinite in nature, but is thought to be the source of that which is infinite.

In the attempt to make this difficult concept easier to understand, if we look at time from the perspective of past, present, and future; we have a quantitative expression. Mystical philosophy states that there is really no past or future, but, rather, that everything occurs in the present, existing in the "now.” If we go one step beyond that and say that there is no present either, we immediately ascribe to existence a qualitative state of being that transcends the common notion of infinity, time, and space. Such attributes then become a part of the whole rather than a description of the whole.

We can multiply infinity by two and arrive at the answ er of infinity. However, if we divide any given num ber in infinity by itself, our answer will be one. Or, if we divide infinity by two, what do we have? Perhaps a subtle indication of an unbounded, unlimited quality that cannot be defined by the term "infinity.”

Open-Mindedness

Throughout history, the advocation of free thought has been a major issue and concern of all societies. Essentially, the advocates of free thought hold the position that w hat we think, how we think, and the m anner by which such thoughts are expressed should be open and unrestricted. It is this last point concerning the expression of our thoughts that is the real issue. If we think about it, we realize that our thoughts are, more or less, private and cannot be controlled or manipulated by others—or can they?

The opponents of free thinking generally hold that the position that all thoughts be brought into the open and put forth to society as propositions or actions that should be adhered to, or at least considered by all people, should not be allowed since the results could be detrimental to the society in which they live. As an example, if an individual is allowed to develop a philosophy that is based upon negative and detrim ental thoughts, and subsequently is able to convince others to adhere to such a philosophy, would such allowance be beneficial or detrim ental to society? In o ther words, if the allowance of "free" thought produces terrorism, genocide, or other destructive acts, does free thought become good or bad?

It is apparent that this is not an easy matter to resolve, since many instances are not so extreme as the example, and no am ount of philosophical debate as to defining "good" or “bad" will find a solution. Such a solution, on the other hand, necessarily must be found within each individual to make a determination of the man-made values of good and evil. It then becomes each individual's responsibility to ensure that he or she has the responsibility, education, and purity of motive to make such a determ ination.

From the perspective of Rosicrucian philosophy and applied esotericism, we intend to evaluate this subject based upon the premise that our readers (who are categorized as thinkers in the fields of mysti­cism, philosophy, and hum anitarian ideals) are already familiar with, at least, the basics of such a topic. It is, therefore, assumed that all the necessary prerequisites for the advocation of free thought are understood and applied to our lives. Undoubtedly, we all strive for purity of motive and altruistic values in our actions.

Assuming that we all have these attributes, we may ask the question: "Will society allow us to bequeath the results of our thinking to others?" It will probably be agreed upon by everyone that if our thoughts are in accordance with and in support of the prevalent government of any society, then we would be free to do as we please. But w hat happens when such thoughts are viewed by the majority as being damaging to the safety and welfare of society regardless of w hether they are or not?

As an illustration of this point, some religions, particularly the new fundam entalism that is now prevalen t in the West, quite frequently state that if we keep an open mind, we would do nothing more than let the devil in. Does not this remind us of the reason why the revolution of ideas came about in the 17th century? Does not this type of thinking take us back to the Middle Ages where religion kept the masses of people under direct control? W hat are we doing now w ith these same attitudes? Have we not evolved, just a little, in the past several hundred years?

In past centuries, it was realized by political and religious powers that if people were allowed to question authority or ask questions that would result in each individual's education, then a challenge would be m ade to the authority of those in control. The solution was quite simple then— the controlling faction merely needed to make a statement that if you do not believe w hat we tell you, then you will be condemned to eternal damnation. Since wealth and religion held a monopoly on education, the ignorant masses had no choice but to accept the validity of such statements.

Fortunately, this system was not allowed to perpetuate itself

indefinitely. The negativeness and faults of ignorance soon became apparent w hen those enlightened individuals w ho realized the im m aturity of such thinking expressed their views although they knew that they w ere taking the chance that their life spans could be considerably shortened. But, knowledge does a remarkable thing. The self-evidence of truth finds many adherents, and w hen many people begin to manifest a belief, then a real and important challenge is put forth to the existing system.

Two things begin to happen at this point. First, the powers that be m ust necessarily modify their position to adapt to the new influx of ideas. And second, the development of the new system and the affiliation of m any new adherents som etim es necessitates that the new structure m ust have specific guidelines. In more instances than not, this new structure necessarily develops a restrictive dogma if the new leaders are to remain in control or if the new movement is to continue in its existence.

As a result, a little bit of knowledge is introduced into the old system and a lot of closed-mindedness is developed in the new. If the new system gains a considerable degree of power, then it may replace the old system, but at this point we ask, "With what?" We must keep in m ind that considerable care m ust be taken to ensure that our initial purity of motive is strongly incorporated into our developing structure so as to be the primary motivation behind it. Again, the issue of collective standards is returned to the individual for consideration.

Let us now assum e that this essential purity of motive is recognized and becomes our prim ary motivating factor. Our true ideal and utopian goal is purely a perpetuation and dissem ination of Truth. We know that we may be confronted, but we also realize that the confrontation will be against our manifesting good thoughts and not with the actual act of thinking them. No one can control such thoughts—or can they?

An illustration of this idea is not unlike our Rosicrucian approach to disease. We are not so much concerned with the symptoms as we are w ith the cause: This is as much true with the freedom of thought. If one intends to underm ine the symptoms, one must go to the cause

of those symptoms, and in this instance, it would be to influence what we think. Therefore, the control and influence of our thoughts, if they are to occur, m ust be approached at the source.

We all believe that we have the freedom to think as we choose. In most instances, we also recognize the freedom to manifest our thoughts as we choose. We pride ourselves in the fact that we can have an open mind, and since the majority supports us in our beliefs, we really do not have to give the subject much thought. However, are we not closing our minds w hen we do not exercise a continuation of thought on the subject? Are we not supported and influenced by those who agree w ith us and who also close their minds?

W ith the freedom to choose it is often found that we choose to be open-minded about one subject but closed-minded concerning another. As an example of this point, consider our religious beliefs, which are very sacred to us. For the most part, the sacredness of our belief is generally defined into a coherent system that is acceptable to ourself. However, if this belief is challenged by a thought or idea that is in contradiction to our belief, do we think about it and incorporate it, or do we dismiss it as being irrelevant and perhaps dangerous? If the former is true, then we can say that we have an open mind. But, if the latter situation is prevalent, then our minds are closed. Given the basic prem ise that we are essentially free thinkers, how can we justify the latter condition if we discriminate between that which is sacred and not to be questioned, and that which is not sacred to us and is, therefore, safe to be questioned?

Perhaps all of us would agree that this point is self-evident because we can see the beliefs and attitudes of other individuals around us who exhibit this distinction. But, what if someone whom you respect were to say to you that there was no truth or validity to your life? W hat would you feel? Would you be outraged? Or, would you wonder what point was about to be made? Or, is there some part deep w ithin you asking the question that perhaps such a state­m ent is true?

If you are asking yourself the latter two questions, then one of two things becomes apparent. First, you are truly open-minded in

your approach; or second, you truly believe what has just been said, w hich m ay or m ay not make you an open-minded individual.

On the other hand, if you are outraged, then again, one of two things would be exhibited. First, your belief is quite sacred to you, and as you accept it on faith, it cannot be questioned. If so, you should seriously ask yourself w hether your mind is of an open or closed nature. Second, such questions may have no relevance to the subject of open- or closed-m indedness because you m ay have already demonstrated to yourself, through inner experience or illumination, that w hat you believe is indeed true and correct. Regardless of the instance, the final estimation of your inner evaluation lies w ithin yourself. You m ust decide which attribute you maintain.

However, the real point being made is that for the sake of our understanding, and for the sake of the perpetuation of Truth for the benefit of all humanity, we m ust ask these questions. We m ust ask these questions because w e m ust know, not m erely believe, that w hat we are doing by way of Work and Service is in accordance w ith the Truth that we have all chosen to serve and perpetuate. If we are to be true to ourselves, if we are to truly represent the mystical essence, we must have the facts, and we must know without doubt that we are doing the correct thing. The only way that we can be certain of this is to ask questions and maintain an open-minded and free-thinking attitude.

O ur work is too important to allow the mediocrity of acceptance by blind faith and mere action without substance to manifest. If we have faith because we are still in the process of trying to learn, let it be reasoned and responsible faith. This attitude is fundam ental to Rosicrucianism. Not only are we to question those things around us, but we m ust treat our questions in a m anner that does not discriminate against the very foundation of our own personal belief. If we can truly challenge ourselves and our beliefs, and are not afraid to change and grow when we realize that we are wrong or admit to our ignorance, then we can truly say that we have an open mind.

Spiritual Attainment

Frequently, we hear the statement that psychic development is indicative of attainment. And, quite often, when people attem pt to evaluate their personal development, they often look to the "unfamiliar" aspects of their beings as an indication of where they stand in relation to spiritual evolution. That is, those aspects of their beings w ith which they are familiar are generally taken for granted as being a common part of themselves and that there is really nothing very special about them.

On the other hand, most sincere students of mystical studies know that there are certain aspects of our beings of which most people are not normally aware. Such aspects include psychic abilities, awareness of mystical experiences, frequent application of intuitive impressions to our lives, and so on. As a result, we often look to the “unfam iliar aspects" and assess our attainm ent based upon the frequency of such experiences.

Suppose, for example, that there is some doubt in our minds as to w hether we have experienced these "unfamiliar'' aspects. What do we then think about ourselves? Do we think that we are not highly evolved because these experiences are seemingly non-existent or few and far between? Do we then desire to have such experiences so that we may become more highly evolved? But, let us suppose that we frequently have conscious awareness of psychic, mystical, and intuitive experiences or o ther types of abilities that we, as mystical students, know exist. Do we then reach a pinnacle of attainm ent in which we know that we have attained? Or, do such experiences become so m uch a part of ourselves that they too, become common and we, in turn, begin searching for ever "higher" experiences to which our desires take us?

Spiritual Attainment 23

If so, do we not have the same attitude of mind that we had before experiencing the unfamiliar? And, if this is true, w hat real difference is there between the former and the latter?

Rosicrucianism is m ystically pantheistic in its outlook. We recognize an all-pervading Oneness that is inherent in all things. Nothing can be separate or distinct from this Oneness and, as a result, we all have the ultimate in attainm ent inherent w ithin our beings and it merely becomes a m atter of realizing this, usually by way of mystical illumination.

W ith these thoughts in mind, we can define attainm ent not in the linear sense as a goal to be achieved by any of our desires, but rather as an already existing state inherent w ithin ourselves. Attainment is not in the desire; it is in what we are! W hat is often mistaken as attainm ent is really our conscious awareness, and it is usually the development of our conscious awareness to which most of our energies are directed. Naturally, one of the goals of our teachings is to increase our awareness so that we may better under­stand and apply the principles learned to our lives. However, it is best that we realize that a subtle distinction exists betw een w hat is known consciously and how far we have attained.

As an illustration of this point, we should realize that there is a distinct difference between psychic and mystical experiences. One of the most important distinctions is that a mystical experience is noetic. That is there would be absolutely no doubt in our mind that we had the experience, and such an experience would result in the influx of knowledge into our lives. On the other hand, a psychic experience may be just that, or we m ay confuse a fantasy or some other form of self-deception as being psychic in nature.

The point is that we do not always know if a particular experience is psychic or if it is of some other quality. But, let us suppose that we do indeed have a qualified psychic experience, as m any of us do. However, since there can exist an element of doubt accompanying such as experience, how are we to determine its quality? In other words, if the experience is not noetic, is the frequency of occurrence of such an experience indicative of any degree of attainment?

To further illustrate this point, how many times have we experi­enced seeing a flash of blue or violet light som ew here w ith in our range of vision? Or, perhaps a "tingling" sensation along the spine or head? Such sensations can be psychic experiences and we should realize that often such physical sensations accompany these experiences.

However, what value does that type of experience have to us? Moreover, what do we do after experiencing such sensations?

We can dismiss them as being unimportant. Perhaps we run to the doctor or psychiatrist thinking that we are having a psychic experience. If so, what do we think?

Some people may jum p to the conclusion that since their experi­ence is "psychic" they have finally attained a “high" state of spiritual evolution, and that the tiny dots of light are representative of profound spiritual contact. On the other hand, others will perhaps understand that those dots of light merely indicate that a particular psychic center is beginning to awaken and that their realization of the impressions is nothing m ore than a routine function of one aspect of themselves not unlike any other function. Who then has a "more evolved’ degree of attainm ent?

The point to rem em ber is that it is not the psychic experience that gives us an indication of our development, but, m ore import­antly, it is our attitude and understanding toward such experiences which reveal to us our attainment. The teachings of Rosicrucianism elaborate upon this point fully in the example of psychic projection. We understand that w hen we are in an unconscious state, such as in sleep, in a coma, or in a state of intoxication, we may unintentionally project, and quite often do so.

Let us suppose that, in our period of attunement, we contact a personality that is projecting. Are we to then assume that because a contact is made, we have reached a high degree of attainm ent and, therefore, the personality that we contacted has an important message of enlightenm ent which we m ust give to the world? We should seriously think about the experience before taking any drastic measures because we do not necessarily have any idea as to what

Spiritual Attainment 25

was contacted. This, in itself, is quite serious. Many of the books on the market today which are concerned with such “messages from Cosmic M asters” are the result of people m isunderstanding their experiences. So, too, are some of the self-proclaimed messengers of the Cosmic Hierarchy. W hat level have these people attained? W hat are they really doing for the dissemination of TYuth?

An im portant point implied regarding the frequency of psychic and mystical experiences while in a subconscious state needs elab­oration. The vast majority of us frequently have experiences while asleep. Further, we may only rem em ber a small percentage of those experiences w hen we awaken. W hat is extremely im portant here is that we do have these experiences and that they are em bedded within us. Further, they are quite applicable and important to our lives—but, we may not have objective consciousness of these experi­ences simply because there is no reason for it. But, if the need arises, the awareness will be there. Just think of how many times we have awakened in the m orning w ith the feeling that something special had happened while asleep, or, perhaps we wake up with a clear perception of a situation which, the night before, was obscure. We may not rem em ber the experience that we have passed through, but it has been applied, for a purpose, to our lives.

Spiritual attainm ent is quite similar. It is one's point on the Path of mystical awakening. It is not assessed by the frequency of psychic or mystical contacts, but, rather, by our attitude to ourself and others, and is measured by our dedication to Truth and our sincerity of effort. If we manifest a degree of interest and intent in the sensational, perhaps we should then reassess our personal values and goals.

Desire

I f you w ere asked the question, "What is the m ost im portant goal in your life?" how w ould you respond? Such a question is quite common, and if we think back over our Lives, we may recall that this question has occurred to us often. But let us also ask ourselves if we have truly considered the question's implications to their fullest extent. That is, have we called upon our deepest resources, our inner convictions, and even our thoughts and aspirations that have evolved from illumination?

Naturally, each of us considers many different types of goals on a day-to-day basis. Some goals are of an immediate nature, where their attainm ent is usually acquired quickly and simply. As an illus­tration of this, we may decide that for this evening's dinner, we would like to have a special dish that is not normally a part of our menu. To attain that goal, we first need to decide exactly what dish we would like to prepare, and then go out to find a store where the ingredients may be bought. The uniqueness of this dish determines the difficulty that we m ust go through to find these ingredients. In this illustration, we may note how our reasoning process consists of, first, a decision; second, a determination of how and where the necessary ingredients can be found; third, the action necessary to acquire those ingredients; and fourth, the preparation necessary to produce the final result.

This simple illustration demonstrates a step-by-step process by which a goal is reached. As simple as it may be, a profound factor should be noticed—that is, the process by which it was necessary to m anifest the desired result. W hat is extrem ely im portant in this instance is not necessarily the desire or the goal that is to be reached, but the methodology utilized to produce the result.

Let us expand upon this thought for a moment. Such a simple goal and its accomplishment is practiced m any times daily by each one of us. Little thought is put into the attainment, and in most cases, the process becomes an automatic action, so that it is unnecessary to put much thought behind it. But, let us suppose that the goal which we w ant to reach is of a m ore complex and difficult nature. Let us say that we decide that we want to purchase an expensive car that we know is beyond our means. The initial idea becomes manifest w ithin our minds, and with continued visualization, it soon becomes a goal which we would like to reach.

As this idea develops more thoroughly and with continued and m ore intricate visualization, we soon reach a point in w hich a decision m ust be made. Either we dismiss the thought as being impractical and, therefore, forget all about it, or we decide that we will attem pt to reach our goal. It is because of the degree of difficulty in attaining the goal that the process, or methodology, m ust neces­sarily become m ore involved. The obstacles need to be overcome, and in the case of the given example, the most im portant obstacle is of a financial nature. Continued visualization, persistence, and desire result in the final realization that to achieve the goal, we must, perhaps, take on another job, or find some other means by which to increase our income.

The above two simple examples illustrate two rather m undane and, perhaps, easily acquired results. The reasoning process is not involved and, frankly, is quite simple. That is, we did not have any difficulty in reasoning out what must be done to achieve the results, nor did we have to use, to any great depth, our inner resources. However, betw een the two examples, we should note one important similarity. The process utilized in both instances was identical. We were able to overcome different types of obstacles by varying the degree by which we thought.

There is nothing unique about this process of attaining goals, and it is something that all of us do many times a day. But w hat about other goals which are of a m ore abstract and ideological nature? Students of mysticism usually have goals of an entirely different nature

in addition to the more m undane ones. Many individuals who are mystically inclined have a goal of Cosmic Illumination. For those of you who have such a goal, we will ask: How many of you have reached it? If you haven't reached that goal, is it because you haven't tried? Or, is it because you haven't found that ever-elusive key which represents the proper sequence of the process or methodology that needs to be utilized?

It has often been said that if one sets a goal that is so abstract, so vague in its nature that no known way for its attainm ent can be found, it will cause eventual frustration for the person w ho origin­ally set that goal. The question may then be asked, should we only set goals that we know we can reach, or should we set seemingly unattainable goals and then face the consequences of frustration and doubts of our own abilities if we do not attain them ? This, natur­ally, is an individual decision that m ust be made based upon one's own personality.

However, we should all be aware that it is not the goal that seemingly cannot be reached, but it is the process needed to achieve that goal which is the cause of our frustrations. If we only realize this im portant and subtle distinction, we can approach the subject from an entirely new and different perspective. Our failures, then, are not the result of our inability to attain the goal, but are m erely a difficulty in either reasoning out the process, or our temporary failure to feel the proper course of action to be taken. W hen it is realized that, essentially, the process for all attainment is the same in its struc­ture, we can find the key, the solution, in the very familiar process of our daily decision making. Just because the goal is abstract does not necessarily mean that its attainm ent is also of an abstract nature.

Once this point is realized, we can find two easily understandable solutions to our problem. The first key is found within the framework of the very basics, the very core of Rosicrucian teachings. This involves a sense of oneness without distinction or separation. Simply, it is the feeling that the Cosmic infuses all things, and all things are an integral part of the One Essence. It is quite evident that the real essence behind our teachings is evolved from what we term mystical pantheism;

that is, that we are a part of the Oneness and can attain a direct knowledge of that Essence and thereby be attuned to it.

But, we m ust think about this concept. We m ust not just accept it as a philosophical belief but feel it, live it, know it! We m ust discover this tru th for ourselves. We need to analyze all possible ram ifications of the varying beliefs that accom pany this philo­sophy, and at the same time, keep that goal of mystical illumination which we may have in mind. With understanding from the head, the intellect, we will soon find that this understanding is transferred to the heart, or indoctrinated deeply into our inner beings. If we then stop to analyze w hat has transpired, we will soon find that a new attitude has evolved which gives us an entirely new perspective of our lives, our goals, and our relationship to all that exists.

The second key, or solution, involved w ith the process used to attain our goals we can call desire.

Let us approach this concept based only upon the word and its implications in relation to a particular goal of Cosmic Illumination. The nature of a desire viewed only from an analytical and mechanistic perspective can create m ore problem s than solutions. From this perspective, if we say to ourselves that w e desire a new car, w hat we are really saying is that we want a new car. The goal to be reached is the car. The desire is merely a want; it is telling us that since we do not have a car, we would like to have one.

Consider the next question very seriously: Is the desire, or want, necessary to attain the goal? Is it really an integral part of the process by which we attain? By stating that we desire or want the car, we are really telling ourselves that we do not have it. Isn't that already known? Isn’t it already understood? W hy is it necessary to reaffirm to ourselves that w hich is self-evident?

Instead of saying that we want the car, wouldn't it be better to ask if we really need the car? An attitude based upon need, rather than want usually produces a slightly different perspective in our attitudes which is usually felt to be more harm onious in nature. Perhaps this will assist in attaining our goals by making them easier to realize.

What about Cosmic Illumination? If we desire Cosmic Illumination, w hat are we really telling ourselves? Are we not saying that because we w ant to achieve it as a goal, we do not have it? In other words, through the desire of attainment, we are admitting to ourselves that it is not already attained.

Let us now consider the two solutions in respect to each other. One of the criticisms of the nature of Oneness without distinctions or separateness is that since all things are identical, such hum an a ttribu tes as wants, desires, o r essentially, any action, becom e irrelevant. That is, a seemingly fatalistic outcome results from what appears to be an elimination of such previously m entioned hum an attributes as desires and wants. W hy do anything if desire becomes non-existent? We can counter such a criticism by asking: Why must we confine ourselves or limit our actions to essentially unnecessary and deceptive attributes?

It m ust be admitted, however, that this type of thinking can be critical to our welfare and attainm ent if the attitude that necessarily evolves from a thorough understanding is not had. It is because the nature of the Cosmic is not dependent upon hum an reason or action that it is absolutely imperative that we view the universe from its perspective rather than from any illusions of our own. Since desire for Cosmic Illumination tells us that we do not yet have it, and the very foundation of Rosicrucian teachings tells us that we are identical to all that is, are we not defeating our purpose, our goal, by dwelling in contradiction? Perhaps the second solution, the second key we call desire, is truly found by its elimination.

Once this point is realized, once this point is ingrained into our hearts, into our inner beings, have we not realized that w e already have attained that which we desire? Have we not really had it all this time? There are not necessarily any "fireworks" involved in this realization, nor are there any strange and mysterious happenings to our being w hen this realization suddenly occurs. There is m erely a profound and actively deep understanding or knowing.

The Movement Toward Enlightenment

I have said and written the following many times: "The ends do not justify the means. It is not the goal that m ust be reached; it is the process that m ust be followed. The goal is merely a result. The process is the act which creates the goal," In mysticism, purity is essential, clear direction a must, and selfless­ness is the act. Anything less is unworthy of our Order. Anything less degrades humanity.

The intent of this article is to attem pt to share w ith you the essence of Rosicrucianism and our direction. To touch this, however, one m ust know, not believe; and one must feel from the heart, not think from the brain.

Our beloved Order is m uch more than a school of mysticism disseminating teachings. It is an initiatic Order of mysticism in the Rosicrucian tradition. W hat does this mean? It m eans that we serve Light, flow with Light, and share w hat we are. We m ust realize that we are not following the course of ordinary hum an standards, but rather those standards of an esoteric and spiritual creation. If we can only understand this simple statement, its implications are profound. The statement as well as the implications can be written in words, but the meaning must be read from the heart. Meditate upon and be illumined by this. W hen realized, nothing more need be said.

Our Order teaches students in the hopes that a few will arrive at a realization. In past years and centuries the Order has gone through phases that were without enlightened individuals. We have called these phases "inactive" or "dorm ant” cycles of the Order. But do not misunderstand this. It does not mean that the Order was perpetuated by unenlightened people. It means, rather, that the O rder had no physical vehicle by which to express itself.

Historically, there have been more times without the O rder than there have been w ith it. Traditionally, there has never been a time that we w ere w ithout the O rder because its essence has always manifested in an "intangible" esoteric creation, merely waiting to be touched by the hearts of those who truly aspire. W hen there is at least one such individual, then the Order manifests on a physical plane. Nevertheless, the Order is never without life and function. It is never inactive: only human perspective makes it appear so. The Path by which to touch the Order is simple. It is by initiation. We leam through service.

We, as hum an beings (for never forget that we are), are in a unique situation today. Not only are we approaching the end of a century, we are also approaching the end of a millennium. There has always been and there will always be a special excitement of charged energy during such an era—especially during the first two or three hundred years afterwards, and sometimes before. We need only observe history to see this.

But today is different from our recorded past. Never before during such a recent recorded cycle have hum ans had available to them such potential and such power. And, perhaps, never before has hum anity been so out of touch w ith its spiritual heritage. W hat are we going to do? That crucial question must be decided now! Note these words to a m odern song w ritten by a group of traditional Australian Aborigines who are connected especially close to myself: "There is an ancient culture and a m odern flock. A drilling rig in a sacred rock. Those angry words upon the flags, w on't make that dream ing come back." (By W arumpi Band). This is m erely one indication of our hum an plight. A 50,000 year-old spiritual culture is in danger of dying. Why? Truly, as with the Order and other spiritual movements, the creation cannot die in spiritual planes; but hum an beings can lose touch. If this happens, we enter the ultimate cycle of starting, again, at the beginning.

The Cosmic is impersonal. It is, and it does w hat it does. It is not concerned w ith hum an affairs other than being our source. We, therefore, m ust realize this and take responsibility for our actions so that we may return home. This is true Service. Such is our purpose as hum an beings.

The Movement Toward Enlightenment 33

The ultimate question arises: Are hum an beings capable of this? The answer, naturally, is "yes." Even though we may not act in that direction, we are capable, as we cannot be separate from the One. However, if we ask if we are accomplishing our goal, then I think the answer is obvious. No, we are not. We are at a crossroads w here the realization of w hat we m ust do is very close, but the act of doing is so far away. It is at this point where the Order is vitally important. We m ust solidify into a movem ent w ithin every aspect of our action to assist others to realize and then to help them act. This is w hat our teachings teach and what the Order, as a collective unit, does in its activities.

Each Rosicrucian is responsible for refining his or her mystical awareness. Followers have always made, in the past and present, the mistake of personifying an avatar and thereby placing all respons­ibility upon this individual, and thus releasing such responsibility from themselves. In history, a person becomes an example, a leader w ho is responsible for teaching of the M aster Within. An imperfect understanding on the part of the student begins to ascribe allegory and myth to the teachings. After a few generations, the myth becomes dogma; and the teachings become a mystery which the esoteric Order preserves in purity and protects in spiritual planes. To know w hat is there, one m ust be there oneself. Such knowledge will not be given in words or “channeled" by others.

It is time to realize that there is no individual avatar. There never was. The avatar is a movement, it has always been. But it is not any movement; the movement is special. The crucial movement is now in the process of maturing. It is the Rosicrucian movement. But it will not manifest unless we, as Rosicrucians, realize our true worth and keep alive within its heart the intensity of fire.

As always, we must be concerned with the physical vehicle, as our foundation is “As above, so below." The physical manifestation of the Confraternity of the Rose Cross is such a vehicle, and Rosicrucians of the past knew this fact quite well. The vehicle was applied toward purposes of Light to accomplish a goal by way of a process, the result being a profound impact upon society. Who is responsible for the introduction of the scientific method, freedom of thought, the elements

of democracy and similar systems, the advancement of peace and culture, and much more? The philosophers and mystics, m any of whom worked within movements, and m any within the Order.

Indeed, the Order has exercised a profound impact upon civiliza­tion in various centuries; most notably during the 17th century. At the same time, we must realize that such impact is not momentary, but rather directed as a process to create a goal. The advanced concepts introduced to hum anity of the past were not to be used for control and power, or even influence although we can see that those of little understanding would attempt to do just that. In reality, that which was introduced was merely m eant to catalyze all people to begin to take the responsibility to speed their way toward enlightenm ent.

Today we are entrusted with the responsibility to perpetuate the movement into the next phase. As Imperator, I am obligated to state that I am fully aware of the responsibility and have shared in the vision of the past and the future. My vows are to assure accomplish­ment. I have seen our success and know the f t th which must be taken. I also know the challenges and obstacles. As w ith all Imperators, my counsel is:

Do that which must be done and can be done in no other way.

In reference to the events occurring within the Order: I will not say why it m ust take place in the m anner that it does, because it is self-evident. I will only say that it does so in accordance with a plan of a future of necessity in which all Rosicrucians share. We must realize the difference between the Order and its physical vehicle, and we m ust realize that the vehicle needs to be a reflection of the Order. Our administration directs the vehicle. Our officers must, by necessity, direct the Order, and they m ust appreciate and serve the Tradition. Of them, I will not accept less than excellence—not because of my own personal feelings, but rather by responsibility of a movement set forth several centuries ago.

Determining Rosicrucian Affiliation

In identifying certain historical persons involved with Rosicrucianism we need to keep in mind that because of various religious and political persecutions of centuries past, Rosicrucians, for obvious reasons, were sworn to secrecy regard­ing their m em bership. Even know n Rosicrucian apologists such as Robert Fludd and Michael M aier never publicly verified their Rosicrucian affiliation.

And yet, we know that a num ber of historical figures w ere Rosicrucian, and if one looks closely there are various references suggesting Rosicrucian affiliation tha t are often overlooked by historians as being insignificant. For example, the Royal Society of today is derived from the efforts of a group of known Rosicrucians: Theodore Haak, John Pell, and Samuel Hartlib, to name but a few. The group was first known as the “Invisible College,'' later as the "Rosicrucian College," and finally as the "Royal Society" a name conferred by King Charles II in 1662.

In researching certain individuals and their associates or col­leagues, a distinct pattern or trend can be observed as the result of association or affiliation with a particular movement. In the case of the Royal Society, there are definite Rosicrucian undercurrents involved.

Quite frequently today, individuals such as Isaac Newton or Rene Descartes are looked upon primarily from scientific or philosophical viewpoints and less so from biographical or historical points of view. Biographies of such historically prom inent individuals often concen­trate on their scientific or philosophical contributions to civilization, often ignoring other aspects of their lives.

In researching and discussing the Rosicrucian affiliation of someone, say, like Descartes, we m ust realize that the Confraternity

of the Rose Cross is a modernized version of age-old Rosicrucianism, organized to m eet the needs of today. In the time of Descartes, the Order was quite differently structured than it is now. In those historic times the Order was not centralized, and in those dangerous times there w ere no m em bership cards or outer signs of Rosicrucian affiliation. The necessity for those Rosicrucians to remain secretive about their m embership has made it extremely difficult for today's historians to document personal Rosicrucian affiliation.

Also the term "Rosicrucian" has often been used generically. An individual might be considered to be "Rosicrucian” because of the nature of his or her ideals—which might happen to coincide with (and thus help perpetuate) the traditional ideals of Rosicrucianism. This is partially what is m eant w hen we refer to the traditional history of Rosicrucianism.

However, I feel that m uch of the traditional history of the Order throughout the centuries can be docum ented, even though the research can be quite difficult and complex.

In reference to Descartes, m uch has been w ritten about his association with the Rosicrucians; however nothing has really been resolved. Much of this confusion stems from Descartes' reclusive and somewhat contradictory nature. On the one hand he denied ever having contacted the Rosicrucians, while on the other hand he is said to have set out on a search for the Order. As a result, historians through the centuries have either supported Descartes' Rosicrucian association or emphatically denied it. Perhaps one of the most revealing works on the subject is Henri Gaston Gouhier's Les Premieres Pensees de Descartes ("The First Thoughts of Descartes"), published in 1958. Most of the book is devoted to the Rosicrucian subject and is a legendary research, in part, from a notebook kept by Descartes at the tender age of twenty-three (1619). Unfortunately, Gouhier does not tell us w here he acquired the journal, or its present location.

It should be mentioned, however, that Gouhier's book is consistent with w hat is known about the accounts of Descartes' life, and the w ork is the last in a line of several w orks concentrating upon Descartes' Rosicrucian connection. The first published m ention of

the subject is in 1624 in Dr. Nicolaes Wassenar's Historich Verhal, w here the author claimed that Descartes was indeed a Rosicrucian. It should be noted that Nicolaes Wassenar is thought to be the father of Jacob Wassenar, a m em ber of the Rosicrucian Circle in Holland. Jacob W assenar was also a close friend of Descartes.

The French historian Charles Adam believed that Descartes was a Rosicrucian, but states that it cannot be proven. However, Adam felt that w hat could be proven practically makes it certain that D escartes was indeed a member. To be m ore specific, Adam is referring to Descartes' associations w ith such known Rosicrucians as Cornelius van Hooghelande (whose father published works on alchemy], Jacob Wassenar, Isaac Beekman, and Johann Faulhaber, to nam e but a few.

Other historians have researched the above point, and it certainly was a popular topic in the Netherlands, France, and Germany at the beginning of the 20th century. However, in more recent times such research has lost its appeal, and presently in England and the United States any mention made concerning Descartes and the Rosicrucians is only made in passing—mainly because the emphasis of research is placed upon Descartes' philosophical contributions rather than upon historical and biographical material. However, regardless of w here the em phasis of research is placed, there rem ain certain aspects of Descartes' life which must be considered. By utilizing the various m ethods to prove Rosicrucian affiliation, written verification by Descartes is not conclusive at this time. We do know, however, that Descartes was preoccupied at an early age with Rosicrucianism, as w ere m any o ther individuals influenced by the Rosicrucian manifestos that were published at that time. Descartes had set out in search of the Rosicrucians, and had made contacts with Beekman and W assenar in Holland, Faulhaber in Germany, and a circle of others. Also, contact was m ade w ith Jan Baptista van Helmont, the famous Rosicrucian w ho tried to reconcile the differences between the mystical and naturalist Rosicrucians.

The friendships that Descartes made w ith various Rosicrucians at an early age w ere retained throughout his life. This fact alone

leads one to believe that D escartes' in terest in Rosicrucianism indeed rem ained alive. Cornelius van Hooghelande, a Dutch doctor who was one of Descartes' closest friends for many years, was actively involved in the study of alchemy, and both he and his father claimed to be Rosicrucians. W hen Descartes departed Holland for Sweden in 1649, he left for safekeeping with Hooghelande a trunk contain­ing personal correspondence and private w ritten material which Descartes wanted no one to read. It will be interesting to discover someday w hat it w as that Descartes actually left behind in that m ysterious trunk. Unfortunately, its w hereabouts are presently unknown. We can only speculate as to its contents, but perhaps the written verification of Rosicrucian affiliation could be found there.

It should be noted that the German philosopher Leibnitz may have had access to some of Descartes' obscure works as he is known to have made some interesting rem arks concerning Descartes' philo­sophy and beliefs. This is not surprising since Leibnitz seems to have had access to various hard-to-find manuscripts. Leibnitz was a close friend of, Francis Mercurius van Helmont, the son of Jan Bapdsta van Helmont.

In reference to lost m anuscripts, in 1620 Descartes w rote a mathematical treatise dedicated to the Rosicrucians entitled "Poly- biicosmopolitani Thesaurus Mathematicus.* All that survives today is the title.

Another close associate of Descartes, Johann Faulhaber, a m ath­ematics professor at Ulm, dedicated his work, Mysterium Arithmeticum (1615), to the "most enlightened and famous Brothers R.C." Other associates of Descartes included Jan Amos Comenius, a Czech theo­logian and teacher, and a circle of English followers, including John Pell, Samuel Hartlib, and Theodore Haak. This circle of friends has been credited w ith the original idea leading to the formation of the Royal Society the original idea actually coming from Theodore Haak. Descartes maintained considerable correspondence with John Pell and, on at least one occasion, had met with Comenius in Holland.

O ther references concerning Descartes' Rosicrucian association are m entioned in a book by a Doctor Meyer, published in 1911.

Also Pierre Daniel Huet, in his memoirs published in 1692, made m any references concerning Descartes and his Rosicrucian connec­tions. Huet also wrote that he felt Descartes did not die in 1650, but faked his funeral and went to northern Sweden w here he devoted the rem ainder of his life to the study of occult subjects. O ther writers have suggested the same theory, citing letters written in 1652 and 1656 between Descartes and his benefactress, Queen Christina of Sweden. These letters are supposedly published in Adam and Tannery's Oeuvres de Descartes ("Works of Descartes"). This work has never been fully translated into English.

It appears that Frances Yates bases her conclusions concerning Descartes on specific source material that can be traced to Haldane and Ross' work, The Life and Times of Descartes, first published in 1905. And that source is taken from the first biography of Descartes, written by Adrian Baillet in 1692, certainly the conclusions are the sam e However, the subject of Rosicrucianism still remains obscure in those writings since the authors were unfamiliar with it. Nevertheless, I believe that in keeping w ith Charles Adam's conclusions, the existing proof is that Descartes was indeed a Rosicrucian. Certainly in line with Adam and Tannery, Gouhier, and even Yates, the subject needs more extensive research utilizing all sources in considering the subject in more detail.

The Mission of the Confraternity of the Rose Cross

A s m em bers of the Confraternity of the Rose Cross (CR+C) we know that our organization is over three thousand years old. But w hat does that signify?

As Rosicrucians, we have a different perspective, as well as under­standing, that only those of a traditional mind can fully appreciate. The num ber of years we have been in existence is not w hat is import­ant. It is the fact that we are, which gives us value. In a linear sequence of events, it makes no difference w hether we have existed for 50,000 years or 10 years. It is what we are that makes us important and, like the year that we celebrate, w hat we are is also unique.

As we study Rosicrucian teachings, we slowly begin to awaken to the values taught by the Order. We slowly begin to unravel the mysteries that surround such topics as cycles and tradition. Through such teachings something almost magical begins to happen. W ithin our hearts an awakening begins of something which is intangible— w hich cannot be expressed by w ords or in te llect—yet, alm ost paradoxically, is expressed by way of a knowing which transcends all knowledge. This knowing is the first sign of an opening into the vastness of mysticism. I think that if we take time to meditate upon what w e have read and learned in the monographs, we will find that our knowledge is much more vast than the words studied. Let us appreciate that, because often unrecognized by the student is the fact that something rem arkable in our individual attainm ents has m ani­fested—a newness, yet ancient beyond measure. W hat is the nature of this "ancient newness"? We will find that answer in our tradition.

Amongst CR + C's m em bership there is a trem endous am ount of interest in our history. The idea that Sir Francis Bacon was an

Imperator, or the concept that 17th century Rosicrucianism exercised a profound impact upon European society and set forth an evolution of hum an thought and custom, excites the imagination and interest. But, of w hat other value is this knowledge? Is it truly important? The answer is both yes and no. No, it is not important if we only allow the interest to excite the imagination and debate endlessly about w hat really happened in Paris in 1622, or w ho really w rote the Rosicrucian Manifestoes. The answer is yes if w e understand and participate in the m ovem ent. H erein lies the "secret" to under­standing the importance of our history and tradition: "To participate in a movement."

W hy is it im portant to preserve and perpetuate our tradition?Because our mission is not yet complete. How many of you have

thought of Rosicrucianism as a movement set forth to complete a mission, or looked at our history and seen that message so blatantly written? How many of you have connected the private teachings we study so diligently—and w hich exercise a profoundly beneficial impact upon our lives—with the Temple initiations and rituals, and wed them with traditional Rosicrucian values? These three points, the Law of the Triangle, produce the fourth—the square or foundation and reveals to us our mission.

In the same way that the purpose of life, an age-old argument, cannot be defined, this mission cannot be stated. Simply put, there are no words. There is only a knowing. As mentioned earlier, this knowing is the vastness of mysticism.

To Rosicrucian mystics, it is a truism that for truth to be known, an awakening m ust manifest. This awakening is a transition from the intellect to the mystical consciousness and its application. This is, naturally, self-evident to Rosicrucians. W ithout such a transition, tru th rem ains elusive. That, too, is self-evident. Before those who know and are entrusted with the truth can state it, there m ust be an audience to receive the truth and, more importantly, to know it. Once we know the truth, we become it, we live it, we are it.

As an example, I made reference earlier to the argument con­cerning w ho w rote the 17th century Rosicrucian Manifestoes, an

argum ent not unlike the one concerning the authorsh ip of the Shakespearean plays. Some scholars say the Rosicrucian Manifestoes w ere written by an individual named Andrea, while others name Sir Francis Bacon as the author, and some even say Dr John Dee. To identify any individual as the author and prove it unquestionably would be to identify the work as the product of one individual. W hether it was intended that way or not, such a m ark of distinction would limit the effect of the work as a product of one individual's m ind for the accomplishment of a specific purpose.

But in areas of Rosicrucianism, w hy is there so much controversy in questions of this type? Perhaps so as not to place limitations. And why not place limitations if not to preserve and ensure the success of a m ission? If the tru th be known, no one person w rote the Manifestoes. They were put into words by one person, and made public by a group. The M anifestoes are not the product of one individual, but, rather, the product of a movement to accomplish a mission derived from the hearts of those who attained a mystical consciousness and w ho necessarily recognized and took the respons­ibility to perpetuate the Work. W hen we remove ourselves from the limitations of individual personality in matters of Light and identify w ith a movement of an omnipotent nature, our mission becomesobvious. We simply know.

Mysticism is an essence. Rosicrucianism is our path, or technique. O ur tradition is our vehicle, consisting of all that we are and will become. In addition to our doctrine and ritual, CR+C is also a cultural and educational organization. Let us not think of the latter two aspects as separate functions or extensions of CR+C, because they are n o t We are not m erely an organization that perpetuates culture and education. We are a traditional culture living in a contemporary society. We are a world society which knows no national boundaries and works in peace and harm ony with all humanity.

This situation is historically unique and, in a way, identifies our m ission as well as explains m any of our actions. W hen past Im perator Ralph Lewis said that Rosicrucian studies assist the student to develop a living philosophy, he was not only speaking of

the personal benefits to individual students, but also ensuring that the elements of the mission are ingrained w ithin each student.

We are a society, we are a culture, regulated by our traditional laws to ensure that we respect, help, and serve humanity, and not fall victim to the limitations of power, control, and w ar problems which beset non-mystical societies and cultures.

More than three thousand years ago, wheels were set into motion and a plan was instituted. Our traditions and our activities were not always limited to physical realities, and could not always be measured by historical docum entation, nor is m easurem ent even rem otely necessary. Mystical reality, Rosicrucian reality, cannot have such limitations. The important thing is that the tradition remained alive in the hearts of many, yet few, people for a very long time. The timelessness of our tradition and the limitlessness of our knowledge have worked for a directed purpose which I feel we will see fulfilled during most of our lifetimes.

However, fulfillment is only a beginning, for w hen a creation is complete, a direction must be intensified. Our beginning is to manifest that direction. It is now, more than at any previous time, that our Work will be the most difficult, and our need is you. Our Order, our mission, requires all of us to push ourselves endlessly and tirelessly.

Sir Francis Bacon wrote of the 'New Atlantis," and many thought that he referred to America. But from our perspective, it is time to realize he did not consider a particular place, but rather a condition of a universal nature to be the “New Atlantis." Plato, in the Timaeus, Critias, and The Republic, wrote of the "old" Atlantis. In the traditional sense, the "Old Atlantis" failed—or did it? The "New Atlantis" is our decision to make.

This is indeed a crucial time. We are beset by ignorance as well as am bition and power. Even our O rder has felt the effects of self-serving individuals and groups who do not want to, or cannot, recognize the mission. But such can only be expected. This is the world condition. W hat will it become? Indeed, our work now is the most difficult, and not everything is clear to everyone. Each of us needs to recognize this situation so that we can know w hat to do.

Do not be misled into thinking that there is a battle between Light and Darkness. There is only Light. We serve Light. Darkness is an illusion. Although it is true that Darkness has been created into a reality, it is still an illusion nonetheless.

We do not fight illusions; we transcend them. But all of this is well stated in our teachings, rituals, and traditions, and, as the mission has dictated for over 3000 years, in our hearts. We face a difficult task, but we have been well taught.

Indeed, this is w hy we traditionally celebrate each new year on the date of the Spring Equinox—to give thanks and to honor our purpose. This year I would like to expand this tradition for a period of fifty-two days, by daily rededicating ourselves to Rosicrucianism and its mission, as well as to conduct esoteric work in our Service to Light and the fulfillment of a plan. I know all of you will continue to w ork in your own way throughout your lives.

We, indeed, have something to celebrate!

Laws of the Rose Cross

In 1656 there appeared an English translation of a Latin work authored by the Rosicrucian Michael Maier. This original work was entitled Themis Aurea and appeared, published in English, as the Laws o f the Fraternity o f the Rosie Crosse.

In this book, Michael Maier wrote: "When there are multitudes and great diversity of Laws, we may probably conjecture that there will happen many crimes and enormities; for he that sleighteth the straight path of Nature and Reason, will certainly be misled into many w indings and labyrinths before he comes to his journeys' end." In reference to the Rosicrucian laws, Maier wrote: "From these incon­veniences our Laws are free, as well in quality as number; they are voluntary, and such to w hom all may easily assent as most Rational."

From the above, it is not difficult for us to perceive the insight that Maier had into the laws and customs of the society of his day. Also, we find in the above statements a distinction made between the necessarily complex structure of a society's legal and judicial system as compared to the simple nature of the code of ethics to which Rosi­crucians adhere. What is this distinction? Was Michael Maier stating that a given society's laws were inadequate, or perhaps unjust, due to the hum an addition or error brought about by the deviation from a "higher" code? And was Maier implying that the Rosicrucians, because of their understanding of this so-called “higher" code, were above a society's set of laws due to their inherent perception and wisdom?

It is quite evident that in centuries past there existed organizations w hich wielded enorm ous power of both a political and religious nature for the purpose of shaping and molding society so as to attain some end. Unfortunately, some of those organizations felt that the

desired goals justified the use of any means to attain them. In other words, the ends justified the means. Such a doctrine results in suffer­ing, contradiction and chaos. Subsequently, the very laws that were designed to guide hum anity could also be used to its detrim ent.

Such can be the nature of power if not correctly understood and practiced with knowledge and responsibility. Rosicrucians and allied organizations and movements have always understood this concept throughout the centuries, and have always sought harm ony and consistency in all of our doctrines and activities. Evolving out of our understanding, there has developed an attitude of dedicated responsibility to the highest morals and integrity that was, and still is, practiced as service to all societies and to all of humanity. Consequently, the Laws of the Rose Cross have not been laws by which Rosicrucians are placed above the laws of society, but are laws of moral integrity instilled within each Rosicrucian voluntarily of his or her own accord and because they are known to be for the ultimate benefit of all.

The distinction between the laws of society and those of the Rosicrucian lies w ithin this moral integrity. It is because of our dedication to the responsibility inherent in our doctrine that we can never accept the dictate that the ends justify the means because we know that the ends are the means. We realize that if all of hum anity is to benefit from the work of the Rosicrucians, there m ust be a consistency of action that conforms to a clear singleness of purpose.

It is this very attitude that has illustrated to the world throughout the centuries the uncompromising service given by Rosicrucians to humanity. No, we have never been, nor have we ever placed ourselves, above the laws of any society. If we were ever to do so, for whatever reasons, we would be guilty of crimes against humanity, thereby contradicting our very purpose of existence. We recognize a system that coincides w ith the m undane aspects of hum an endeavors and silently work within a given structure so that the structure may grow and evolve.

The Laws of the Rose Cross, which Michael Maier reintroduced from previous times into the world of the 17th century and which Rosicrucianism brings into the 20th century, are the integrity and

responsibility mentioned previously. The second law stated in the Fama Fratemitatis and repeated by Maier best describes the attitude of Rosicrucians of the past, the present, and the future. That law states: "That none of them , notw ithstanding their being of the Fraternity, shall be enjoyed one habit; but many suit themselves to the custom e and mode of those countries in which they reside."

Simply stated, Rosicrucians will adapt, conform, and abide by the laws and customs of each and every country in which the Order exists. Further, we will utilize and w ork w ith the custom s and traditions w ithin each country and respect them for what they are without thought of changing them to suit some other purpose. We as Rosicrucians do not see ourselves as being separate and distinct from the society in which we live, nor do we perceive ourselves as being elevated above any other person or group of people. We are not "special.” We are not elite or privileged individuals, nor are we a secret society that has access to information hidden from all other persons. We simply look at what is and work in harm ony w ith it for the purpose of bringing about a condition in the world that benefits all.

Today's world is, perhaps, unlike any other era in recorded history. Our major world powers are essentially guided in their technologically advanced societies by an economic-based ideology in term ingled w ith spatterings of diverse form s of philosophic concepts. These concepts range from the school of rationalism made popular during the 17th century, to the 19th century school of empiricism. Subsequently, these concepts lent themselves to the formation of a variety of economic philosophies which serve as a foundation for today's m odern societies.

It appears to be the destiny of some people to arrogantly assume that the way in which we live today is so m uch better, so much more advanced, than it was in the past. Or, "My way is so m uch better; therefore, you must conform to my thinking—or else.* It is true that what we have today is different from what was had in the past, as it will be from what will be had in the future. Does that mean that future generations and societies will be better than our own? Will they be more evolved, thereby making us inferior? Is the 20th century

American, European, or African more evolved than the 17th century American Indian, or the ancient Greek, or the ancient Egyptian?

Why do certain religions send missionaries to various locations for the purpose of converting people to their way of thinking? Is it because their particular belief or faith is truly better than the other? Must we have "pity" upon, let us say, Australian aboriginal society and traditions because they do not see as we do?

Or, is it possible that if we really tried, our society could benefit from certain elements of let us say, aboriginal society, from which they find inner peace and harmony? The point is that before we can truly be of service to others, that is, before we can help them, we m ust be perfectly clear about our intentions and motives and be sure that they are of the highest integrity. We m ust always be cognizant of the fact that the process of teaching is identical to the process of learning, and that teaching necessitates learning.

Truly, today's world is unlike any other era. It is not difficult to see that standards and values are changing. But this, in itself, is not new because standards and values have always been changing. Perhaps what makes an era unique is not the change that is occurring, but rather our reaction to that change.

Many people have the tendency to think that we are entering into a "New Age," complete with a "New Age" philosophy. With this philosophy comes the attitude that hum anity is entering into an era of enlightenm ent—an enlightenment characterized by such phrases as: "Who were you in your last incarnation?1', or, "That is bad karma." Some people are preoccupied with having their auras read or flock to listen to a medium "channeling" words from a discamate personality. O thers join organizations that guarantee followers the personal guidance of "Cosmic Masters" to such an extent that one's salvation is guaranteed regardless of their inner commitments.

Is this attitude really unique to our era? Or, can we see parallels to medieval belief? Is this attitude a result of enlightenm ent, or is it a reaction based on a dissatisfaction w ith a technological and economic-based society?

It is indeed good and important that hum anity is entering into

an era in which value is being placed upon the elevation of con­sciousness, but let us be cautious of the sensationalism that is being placed upon psychic phenomena and its resulting fatalistic attitude. Let us not confuse mysticism with such sensationalism. We must always be mindful that our highest mystical ideals are built upon a solid foundation of responsibility and integrity which means nothing unless it is applied and practiced for the benefit of all.

What is occurring is not new to our age. Perhaps the sensational attitude is new, but the traditions, integrity, and responsibility of legitim ate m ovem ents have alw ays been w ith us as we w ork silently in the Art Of Service. Indeed, the Laws of the Rose Cross are still applicable.

The Value of Tradition

W h a t has Rosicrucianism, contrib­uted to society and, subsequently, humanity? W hat is Rosicrucianismcontributing now?

Questions such as these are often asked by both members and non-members of our Order who are seriously trying to assess the value of our organization in today's world. But, before we can adequately answer such questions, we must understand the perspective from which they are asked. That is, we m ust understand the reasons for such questions.

Quite often such questions are based upon a material concern. In other words, the answer sought is expected to include information concerning tangible evidence of the establishment of our organization in the same way that businesses often establish branches which will produce goods and jobs for any given society.

It is apparent, however, that the nature of Rosicrucianism is such that we cannot always give the same kind of answer that a business can. We m ust understand that our Order is a cultural, educational, and mystical organization dedicated to the advancement of humanity through enlightenm ent of the individual. Therefore, our answers to such seemingly simple questions far exceed the sim plicity of their nature because our answers m ust necessarily derive from our highest idealism, our mysticism, and the essence which it represents. Further, such answers m ust lie in the commitment, dedication, and sincerity of our members according to their understanding of the idealsof our teachings.

Perhaps the best way to understand the real essence of our con­tributions is to understand our tradition. We are a traditional Order.

The importance of this statement, at first glance, may be overlooked by some people in that the value of tradition is often misunderstood. Nevertheless, it has a profound mystical and philosophical meaning. The problem in understanding the import of such a statement could lie in the belief that tradition is outdated, limiting, and restrictive to creative growth in that it is thought to be conducive to creating dogmatic beliefs. This may well be true of any tradition if it becomes stagnant in its mode o f operation. However, the true purpose and intent of any tradition is to perpetuate and preserve a cultural heritage and its inherent wisdom throughout the ages so as to make it available to all.

From this statement, we can readily see that tradition is not a thing in itself, but m ust necessarily be related to a source of a deeper intent. Tradition, then, becomes a condition that is neither restrictive nor creative, but rather a tool or a means which assumes the attribute of neutrality. In other words, it will become only w hat it represents. Tradition most aptly represents a cultural heritage. Culture, in itself, can never be restrictive or dogmatic since the cultural heritage is the foundation and strength of any given society. In other words, any society which exists today, and even hum anity in general, is built upon foundations laid in the past. W hether or not such foundations are thought to be limiting or creative will depend upon how such foundations are understood or interpreted by the individual.

What, then, are the attributes of culture? Culture represents the beliefs and efforts of a people who constitute a society. Inherent within these beliefs are found a philosophy, art, music, and an arcane wisdom that is traditionally passed from one generation to the next and thereby preserved as a source or foundation to that particular society. We may also observe the appearance of degenerative qualities that assume a negative aspect. But if we stand apart from that society and observe how it progresses, we will find one crucial factor, namely, that all aspects of generative and degenerative qualities are essential in producing change and adaptation to new situations by each successive generation.

If we look at these "negative" qualities from this perspective, and

see them as sometimes being necessary elements to initiate change and growth, we can change our perspective from one that is negative to one that is positive. With a positive outlook, it becomes easier for us to recognize a distinctive element which pervades and survives all changes and which identifies a particular society. That element isw hat we call custom or tradition.

If we become even more objective in our evaluation and observe not one society, but all societies or hum anity as a whole, we may be surprised at what we find. We will find a common, unifying denomin­ator that bonds all hum anity—and once again culture and tradition. Different cultures and traditions have modified, adapted, changed, and infused all societies. In extreme cases, w hen a particular society and culture have been conquered by another, it soon becomes evident that the indigenous culture also changes and modifies the new culture— m aybe very slowly and subtly, but change it does, nonetheless.

As a result, each successive society has grown and evolved in the long run because the true essence, the wisdom, the true foundation of all of hum anity is all pervading and remains creative in potential. This creative element can never really be destroyed. It is from this vantage point that we can realize the true creative value of tradition. Thie traditions are not acts; they are the essence which bonds all peoples even though expressed in many different ways.

What then has Rosicrucianism contributed to society? If we realize that our tradition is based upon tolerance, understanding, education, and the upliftment of all humanity, we will realize that our tradition is the unifying, creative potential that is the essence of all tradition and cultures. That is, our tradition perpetuates the very essence of cosmic and hum an potential that is known as arcane wisdom.

We have recognized the com m on th read that bonds all of hum anity into one unit—a factor which was realized by our tradi­tional founders thousands of years ago and is still preserved in our mystical philosophy, rituals, and attitude today. In fact, we would not be Rosicrucians if it w ere not for the preservation of our tradition. By realizing that all cultures and societies have these same foundations, we therefore seek to preserve and perpetuate those

aspects of custom which represent the highest ideals of Truth and the betterm ent of all.

We do this not by supplanting a given culture by another, but by encouraging its growth and development from within through the m edium of our m em bers in each society, who are taught to exhibit tru th and understanding to the best of their abilities and to work with the structure of each society. We encourage a society's preservation and growth by exemplifying the common bond, the common brotherhood.

Rosicrucianism exists in most of the world's societies and cultures. Our teachings relate the fundam ental laws and principles of the all-pervading essence that we call the Cosmic and are designed to assist our students in their discovery of truth. We do not force people to believe or tell them w hat to believe, but rather encourage them to develop their own beliefs. W hat our Order contributes to society is relative to how our members react to our teachings. In some societies, we will find the establishment of m useum s and cultural centers that are for the benefit of all people. We will find our O rder assisting anyone w ho is in need. But, most importantly, our Order contributes to culture, education, and service to all humanity.

Perspective: The Importance of Versatility

T h e m anner in which the universe is perceived varies according to the conscious entity that is doing the perceiving. As an illustration, we are rem inded of the story of the blind m en and the elephant. Each of the men, touching a particular part of the animal, described the "true" nature of the elephant. The m an touching the foot stated that an elephant is like a tree stump, while the individual touching an ear confirmed that the animal is like a palm leaf. Not until sight was restored to these individuals were they able to view the "true" nature of the elephant as it fully appears. In a sense, it can be said that w ith sight comes illumination. Is such not similar to the nature of Cosmic Consciousness?

As past Imperator, Ralph Lewis, stated, "Cosmic Consciousness is simply consciousness of the Cosmic.' Yet, we understand that such a consciousness transcends our norm al consciousness—our ability to perceive and understand the universe around us. M any of us w ho have discoursed at length w ith others will readily agree that differences of opinion indicate a variance in understanding. Such variances, therefore, relay the distinct possibility that the very basis of reality itself is subject to interpretation. If we think about this for a moment, we may find that an entirely new perspective of under­standing is revealed.

If reality is subject to interpretation, what, then, is the true nature of reality? Is it an unchanging absolute that can have only one correct interpretation that has somehow managed to evade the complete understanding of a m ultitude of enlightened minds? Or is it an ever- changing condition that has no foundation in truth and knowledge as we conceive it?

Rene Descartes, the 17th century philosopher, claimed that there are essentially two types of reality—the formal and the objective. One is concerned w ith the natu re of that w hich exists regardless of how it is perceived, and the other with our understanding and interpretation of that which exists. W hether or not the two realities are identical depends upon the perceiver.

Rosicrucian studies delve in great detail into the nature of reality, and in order to be clear about this topic, it is essential for us to have a full grasp of evolved Rosicrucian mystical philosophy. Like Descartes, we essentially recognize two types of reality—that which we call reality and that which we call actuality. Actuality is defined as the true nature of being regardless of how it is understood to exist, and it is that which is not determined by interpretation. Reality, on the other hand, is our conscious realization of our understanding of the universe around us—in both its material and immaterial aspects.

In other words, reality is not only concerned with the m undane and material aspects, but with the psychic and even mystical as well. Simply, reality is nothing more than our conscious ability to perceive. And, like the blind m en and the elephant, how we perceive—our perspective—determ ines our universe, our reality.

Philosophically, such a concept creates quite an enigma in that we find certain questions raised that resemble puzzles more than anything else. Such questions are: Can we know actuality, or only think that we know? Is Cosmic Consciousness, that ultimate state of evolved awareness, an inclination, an understanding of the true state? Or is it merely the understanding of a slightly different reality the true state still eluding us?

Though puzzling, these questions indicate the nature of mysticism and we, as students of mysticism, have dedicated ourselves to their resolution. However, we must not jum p to conclusions and assume that we have the answers. To do so would be quite presum ptuous on our part in that it is quite conceivable that we are not necessarily looking for answers, but, rather, merely a means by which to understand the questions.

If we approach the problem with such an attitude, we may find

that we can shift our direction slightly and reevaluate our purposes. First, we m ust realize that the Confraternity of the Rose Cross [CR+C], is not supplying us w ith answers to the questions related to the ontological essence or mystical enlightenment, but rather, it is guiding us in the understanding of mysticism itself so that we may expand our realities to the maximum of our abilities. Secondly, at the same time, CR + C assists us in the practical development of our own individual, personal philosophy so that we may exist in our world, our reality, in a way that is as m uch in harm ony w ith the natural essence which we call actuality as we can possibly conceive. We know that our responsibility as students is to apply ourselves to the best of our abilities and only we can do that. No one else can do it for us. CR+C's purpose is simply to assist in this regard by making available a system of m ysticism that has the search for tru th , knowledge, and wisdom at its core.

The astute student of mysticism will realize that w hat we have considered so far is that regardless of our physical or spiritual evolution, our first contention must be with our realities. Our second understanding is that since reality is not absolute, but dependent upon the way it is perceived, we should recognize that an emphasis on reality itself is misplaced. Rather, an emphasis m ust necessarily be placed upon our perspective for the sim ple reason that our perspective, or the m anner in which we perceive, will determine our reality.

Common sense then tells us that to grow and learn, we m ust be open and receptive to new and unknown experiences, mull them over, and apply their lessons to our lives in an unbiased manner. In other words, we must stand in another's shoes and see from another's eyes, and, more importantly, challenge not only another's beliefs, but our own. Let us demonstrate versatility in our perspective.

For example, usually accompanying such concepts as the occult, the psychic, or mysticism, is an element of the sensational that has unfortunately typified the common understanding of these terms and reduced them to a perspective of divination, fortune telling, prophecy, spiritual guides and the like. This has occurred to such an extent

that the person not intimately acquainted w ith the seriousness of responsible mysticism usually pursues such subjects for the purpose of entertainm ent. How long will I live? Who will I m arry? Will I be rich? Was I an important person in a previous incarnation? Am I a m em ber of the Great W hite Brotherhood? Am I pretentious enough to be the sole concern of the Masters?

W hat has happened to the responsibility needed to seriously explore mystical reality? Are we able to seriously challenge our realities so as to discover truth thus allowing our perspective to grow and to evolve?

There is nothing wrong in having an interest in astrology or the tarot, for example. But, if we have such an interest, we should not let the common stereotype interfere with our dedicated quest. Let us apply our versatility of mind to those subjects as well so as to discover their true purpose and intent. Let us recall that area of our studies which considers motive, purpose, and intent, as well as the function of any given thing, and see if we cannot evolve our perspective so as to become aware of new possibilities.

In the first part of the article, we have considered the value of reality and asked some pertinent questions. We have also considered the postulation that our "realities" are determined by our perspective, or how we view those impressions around us.

I would now like to apply this concept of versatility of perspective to a popular system often used for fortune telling in recent times, and see what would happen if we shift our interpretation slightly.I would like you to analyze your personal interpretation, compare it w ith the one I relate, and see if it produces a third effect that, perhaps, is more evolved in purpose.

The system we will consider is the tarot. The perspective by which we will approach the tarot is from that of Christian Pitois, the 19th century librarian of the Ministry of Education in Paris, who discovered a unique m anuscript rifled from the Vatican archives during the Napoleonic wars. Incidentally, Pitois circulated among such m en as Eliphas Levi and Papus, and was intimately involved with the formation of 19th century Rosicrucianism.

According to Pitois, the manuscript related a history of a secret

preserved by the O rder of the Temple (Knights Templars), and perpetuated through the tarot. The Templars, apparently, acquired their information from a series of tw enty-tw o plates kept in the Middle East after the Roman conquest of Egypt in 47 BC Prior to that time, the plates were actually paintings existing in a gallery in one of the halls of an Egyptian M ystery school.

Apparently the Egyptian M ystery school, w ith the gallery of twenty-two frescoes, used the paintings to depict twenty-two centuries of prophetic history. As the account continues, the Templars acquired these plates while in the Middle East and were entrusted w ith their preservation. However, in AD 1307, when the Order of the Temple was dissolved, the Templars decided to preserve their entrusted secret by introducing additional cards and releasing the set as playing cards for the purposes of gambling and games of chance, their logic being that if they attempted to hide the plates, they would be lost. How better to preserve the plates' esoteric worth than by introducing them to the profane world under the guise of profane intent? It seems they felt that gambling was more valuable to the interests of the masses of hum anity than esoteric truth.

Let us now examine the documented history of the cards to see if we can find a relationship. We find the first recorded m ention of the cards in AD 1325, and they were called naibi in Italy. This may be a corruption of the Arabic word nabi, meaning "prophet." Seven years later the King of Castile forbade knights to gamble at cards. In 1361 Caesar Nostradamus wrote about the cards in a casual way. By August 1427 the cards had arrived in I^rxs. In 1472 the book Gulden Spiel claimed that the cards were introduced into Germany about the year 1300. About 200 years later, we find Gypsies using the cards to tell fortunes.

Thus, to the best of our knowledge, the earliest year associated with the appearance of these cards is 1300, although 1325 is a more well-documented date. The Order of the Temple was dissolved in 1307, although the entire process took an additional few years, culminating in the execution of the Grand Master. From this information we can see the possibility of this theory since the time frames are quite close.

In addition, Pitois, Levi, and Papus claim that the tarot, origin­ally spelled taro, was an anagram OR for Order, TA for Temple (pronounced tample). These ind iv iduals also claim ed tha t the function of the cards from their inception in Egypt was to portray twenty-two centuries of prophetic history. Interestingly, the time span portrayed is from the 1st century BC to the 21st century AD For us to analyze this aspect, we m ust consider a few of the major arcana so as to get an idea of what is being said.

I I The High Priestess: The first card we will examine is the second card of the major arcana, the High Priestess. Here is depicted a stately woman with a mantle, a tiara, a cross on her chest, and a book on her knees while sitting on a throne. This card covers the 1st century of our era and is an allegory of the formation of the Christian Church.

IV The Emperor; This, the fourth card of the deck, symbolizes the 3rd century. The em peror sits on a throne and holds a scepter. A shield showing an eagle is by his side and his legs are crossed. During the 3rd century, a decision was passed that a Roman Emperor would be elected by the army. Diocletian (AD 245-313) was the Emperor and he attempted to stabilize the Roman Empire. It is said that the crossed legs allude to Christianity. Certainly, during this era, a reign of terror engulfed the first Christians.

VI The Lover: The sixth card is called the Lover as well as the Two Ways. A young m an stands between two women at a crossing. This card was supposedly painted to allegorically depict the separation of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires in the 5th century.

X The W heel o f Fortune: This tenth card depicts the 9th century. A monkey and a dog turn a wheel, over which hovers a sphinx w ith a crown. The wheel of fortune turns with the crowning of Charlemagne in AD 800. This portrays the establishment of the rule of the Divine Right of Kings w hich will last for 1000 years. The Carolingian

Renaissance the beginning of learning in the Occident is portrayed by the crowned Sphinx, the eternal symbol of wisdom.

X II The Hanged M an: The twelfth card of the Tarot depicts a m an hanging upside down by one leg and with his arm s bound behind him. The other leg is crossed. On his yellow skirt are two crescents. The 11th century opened with the profanation of the Holy Sepulcher by the Moslems in 1009, and closed with the occupation of Jerusalem by the Crusaders in 1099. Again, we find the crossed legs referring to Christianity, and the crescents, an allusion to Islam. This is a century of victims, both Christian and Moslem alike.

X III D eath: The thirteenth card depicts the 12th century A skeleton armed with a scythe mows down hum an heads. In this century, more crusades were fought, and the hordes of Genghis Khan (1162-1227) emerged from Mongolia and reached the Adriatic leaving destruction and skulls behind.

X V I Tower o f D estruction (originally, The House of God): The sixteenth card allegorizes events in the 15th century. Lightning strikes the tower, and in the original deck a crowned m an falls while another lies on the ground. W hat does this card represent? Perhaps the lightning is a symbol representing the discovery of printing which spread light and knowledge and, at the same time, underm ined the Church scholasticism and royal authority—hence the falling king and felled priest. We find a century w here freedom of thought was shaking previously held concepts. And, certainly, the discovery of America in 1492 caused a reaction not unlike the Old World being struck by lightning.

X V II The Star: The allegory of the 16th century is appropriate for this era of astronomers. Copernicus died in 1543, Tycho Brahe was born in 1546, Giordano Bruno in 1548, Galileo in 1564, and Kepler in 1571.

The Fool: A curious thing about this card is that is has no number. The question then arises, where should it be placed? What century does it depict? Most alleged experts of the tarot place the card last in the deck—card 22. But not so with Pitois, Levi, and Papus. They place it just prior to the last card, making it card num ber 21 depicting the 20th century. If we look at our century, we may find many foolish activities. M odem warfare resulted in the death of sixty-eight million people in just two suicidal World Wars alone. The advent of nuclear weapons and technology running rampant are just two things that should cause us to think about where we are going. In the original deck is depicted a careless-looking man wearing a fool's cap who is about ready to walk off a precipice. A dog attempts to pull him back. The fool card stands between the judgment card depicting the century of revolutions at the end of 1000 years’ rule of Divine Right of Kings and the advent of democracy, and the World card depicting the 21st century of enlightenment. According to the cards, it appears that we m ay survive the 20th century in spite of ourselves.

We may note that the symbolism of the decks can vary as they progress through the years. This is probably because different people apply personal interpretations according to the perspective that they hold for the individual purpose and motive that they wish to convey.

The Confraternity of the Rose Cross [CR+C], does not deal with the tarot or other systems such as astrology, etc, for the reason that such systems are not necessary to the essential basics of mysticism. In fact, through modern interpretation, individual perspective, and so on, changes usually result which cloud the real motive and intent, thus altering reality. According to some sources, the tarot was initially a conveyance of prophetic history. At one time, it was a means of gambling, and later it became a system of fortune telling. We must then ask: Which is the true way?

The ones who will make the ultimate decision are ourselves. If we are interested in fortunes, there lies our reality. If we are more concerned with truth, then that is the path we will take and our actions will be made accordingly. All this is a matter of perspective.

The whole point of this message concerns the value of perspective and the ability to demonstrate versatility. In other words, we must be able to look at anything in such a way so as to derive the most from it for purposes of growth and advancement. In this article, the tarot was only used as an example to demonstrate that perspective can be ever-changing, and that we should not limit ourselves to only one interpretation. As far as tru th is concerned, we need to discover it ourselves, and the m ore tools that we have available for our use, the easier it will be to achieve the results we are looking for. But, again, as a m atter of perspective, let us not th ink of tools as being a system, such as the tarot, that is external from ourselves, but, rather, as a versatile process called perspective that is innate w ithin our beings and which is only confined by those limitations that we place upon it.

Do the Ends Justify the Means?

O n c e Rosicrucian students become fam iliar w ith the teachings of the Order, it then becom es their responsibility to apply w hat is learned to their lives. However, m uch more is involved in this process than m erely applying a law or a principle for one's own personal benefit. The motives behind our applications are extremely important in that they actually determine what the end result will be.

In other words, we are not only afforded the opportunity, through Rosicrucian teachings, to apply certain laws and principles to assist us to reach a determined end, but we also m ust apply our complete understanding to the situation and weigh all alternatives before acting. We m ust always ask ourselves if our motives are pure and in accordance with the laws and principles which are being utilized.

The expression of the Cosmic through its laws and principles does not distinguish between the variations of manifestation. That is, it does not choose or single out one person or thing over another for the purpose of arbitrarily bestowing an unearned gift or reward. If such w ere true, it would necessitate that the Cosmic actually be an anthropom orphic entity w ith human-like attributes and qualities.

Rosicrucian philosophy stipulates that the Cosmic is actually impersonal in its nature and functions through an orderly system of laws. However, w hen the Cosmic is consciously experienced to some degree by an individual, one may interpret it as being a personal experience, but this has no actual relevance to the Cosmic itself.

By “impersonal," we do not necessarily m ean that the Cosmic is merely a mechanistic function of gears and levers that operates like a machine, but, rather, it is an all-pervading essence that infuses all things

and has a consistent m anner that causes it to persist in its existence. We, as individuals, are in reality individual expressions of that essence, and we function in accordance with the existing cosmic laws.

Perhaps it can be argued from a purely scientific perspective that the Cosmic is nothing more than a machine as it is observed to operate as such. However, from a mystical perspective, which is the core of Rosicrucian thought, we can perceive those very same observations and arrive at an entirely different interpretation. Through a conscious attunem ent w ith the Cosmic, we can ascertain in it the benevolent qualities of peace and harmony. We also gain an understanding of why it is important to develop our own initiative and take the responsibility to grow and evolve, and w hy these attributes are not just given to us.

With this understanding, we can then see that there is more to the universe and the world we live in than is normally understood. However, it is im portant to note that regardless of w hether we understand this or not, the Cosmic will function as it does and not the way we may want it to function. For this reason it is imperative that we ensure that we act w ith understanding and purity of motive. Otherwise we can get lost in an endless circle of fighting, sometimes where there is no battle. Such is the nature of free c h o ice -ev en though we may choose to act "against'1 Cosmic Law, we are, in reality only abiding by its dictates and are merely reacting on another levelof manifestation. _

However, as far as our individual selves and hum anity are concerned, such actions that are not representative of our highest aspirations could have disastrous effects upon ourselves and others. For the most part, every action we take is merely either a part of a process to arrive at a specific end, or is an end in itself. We work so that we may live in society in a m anner that is acceptable to our individual preferences; we read for enjoyment or for the acquisition of knowledge; and so on. In other words, we either have a conscious or unconscious goal that we attempt to reach, and our actions are therefore a process by which to achieve that goal.

In the instance where we have a conscious goal that we would like to reach, the consideration of the goal is our first concern. After the

goal is determined, we then m ust decide upon a way by which to attain that goal. If our goal is to merely eat dinner, little thought is required to determ ine the process. We only need to find food and prepare it. But if our goal is to serve humanity, our task becomes much more difficult since our goal is very abstract, compounded by the fact that there are many different interpretations of w hat "serving humanity" actually means. Suppose, in such a quest, we confront another person who has a viewpoint diametrically opposed to ours. W hat could happen?

An adheren t to m ystical doctrines is generally the type of individual who would be more apt to have a goal such as service to humanity. In fact, most of this person's goals will have an altruistic value primarily because of the feeling of wanting to give, to help, and to share the sense of goodness and love that accompanies the mystical experience. It is here that we m ust be extremely careful as to the methodology that we use, and it is here that recalling all the wisdom and understanding that we have acquired m ust be utilized. At this point we m ust think of our own experiences and apply them to the best of our abilities.

If thought about, the students of Rosicrucianism, or mysticism, will recognize that they w ere never forced into their actions, beliefs, or knowledge. Such were acquired through persistent hard work and effort. Through such efforts, a channel of attunement w ith the Cosmic was opened, and a knowledge and wisdom of the Cosmic and its processes were acquired, or earned. The role that the Cosmic played, if we can differentiate it as being distinct from ourselves, was one of direction and influence because we attuned to it. By understanding this role, we can readily see how important it is to apply w hat we learned through our own experience and attainment to whatever good we m ay wish to achieve. In other words, not only m ust the goal be in accordance w ith purity of motive, the process m ust be as well.

Let us suppose, on the other hand, that an individual is not concerned with altruistic values and acts purely out of self-interest. Further, let us suppose that this individual's goal is power and control over others merely for the sake of his own desires. What process would

such a person use to acquire this goal? With such motives, would not any means be used or be capable of being used to ensure that the desired ends are met?

Fortunately, only rarely does this type of individual wield enough power to control large num bers of people. More frequently, we encounter individuals of noble and altruistic goals who say that they act out of the best interests of others and that they are serving humanity, and sincerely believe this. But, unless they think about all of their actions, especially the means by which their goal is to be acquired, and act accordingly, they can run into serious difficulties. Often these individuals are so convinced of the goodness of their goal that their over enthusiasm tends to make them farce their methods onto others. Regardless of the goal, how would you react if you felt that you were being forced into a situation?

There are many people who believe that the axiom "the ends justify the means", is valid and correct, and would go to any extreme to lie and deceive, if necessary to arrive at their goal. We ask, if such a means is utilized, can the goal, or end, truly be as altruistic and good as originally thought? We must reiterate that a full understanding of a situation be sought, that a search within our beings be enacted, and the dictates of our conscience be followed if we choose to act in harmony with the highest laws of the Cosmic that we can comprehend.

With knowledge and wisdom comes a synthesis of ideas and actions. We can begin to comprehend an overall perspective and thereby be in a better position to decide which course to take. With this synthesis we can recognize a harm ony between the goal and the process and perhaps realize that they are identical from a mystical point of view. From a personal point of view, karmically, our goal depends upon the process and we must ask ourselves if our end result is truly good if we utilize questionable means.

Legend

T h e Lost Continent of Atlantis, the subterranean cities of Agharti, and the Kingdom of Shambhala invoke a peculiar type of concept—or even, perhaps, a memory in the minds of people who hear of such places. It is difficult to describe the feelings that one experiences w hen contemplating the legends that surround these mysterious areas. But if we think about it, we m ay note that the impressions we have are distinctly different from those of, let us say, 17th century France or of 19th century England. Why?

Consider the differences between what we know about 17th century France and the Kingdom of Shambhala. France is a country that exists today and we can chronologically document its history for a num ber of centuries. We have access to facts which are academically acceptable to historians and other professionals. There is nothing so mysterious about French history, nor anything readily accessible concerning 17th century France, which will incite the imagination to the same degree as does the mysterious and legendary Kingdom of Shambhala.

However, in the case of Shambhala, we have an entirely different situation. Here we have a mysterious place that some people say exists, but nobody really agrees as to where, or even if, it actually exists. As a result, there are many different interpretations of Shambhala, ranging from a non-corporeal myth to an actual physical abode of highly evolved beings.

In the example of Shambhala we have a distinctively different thought process employed in its study than we do in the study of French history. Since many people think that there is no documented evidence of the existence of Shambhala, then our normal research patterns cannot be effectively employed in attempting to determine

its reality. But, upon further serious consideration, we will find that this is not necessarily the case.

The problem in researching allegedly "mythical" places and in the conclusions draw n by "authorities" lies in the limited information available for research purposes. Consider, for example, the legendary city of Troy. Before it was unearthed, it was a myth simply because there was not enough acceptable proof to prove otherwise! But, what about the myth of Shambhala? Is there any evidence to prove otherwise?

In the West there is very scanty reference to Shambhala, but we do find occasional reference dating back several hundred years. Usually, the reference tells of some individual retreating for a time in the remote areas around Tibet. However, if we turn to Eastern sources, we will find a wealth of additional material that could be utilized to assist us in forming an unbiased conclusion. But, there still exists one major problem in trying to discover the truth using the assistance of available Eastern sources. Namely, there is no real agreement as to where, and more importantly, how Shambhala exists.

As to where Shambhala is located, we will find varying opinions. Some people feel that its location is in a remote area of Tibet. Others think that it is in the m ountains around the Takla M akan Desert of far western China. O ther locations include Ladakh, Mongolia, and even Siberia.

How Shambhala exists is also an interesting subject. Some say that it is a city; others, a kingdom or a hidden valley on the physical plane of manifestation. In addition, some beliefs state that Shambhala is not a physical reality, but, rather, that it has a non-corporeal existence on one of the higher planes of manifestation. And, in some instances, some people feel that Sham bhala's reality is both corporeal and non-corporeal at the same tim e!

However, the fact remains that Shambhala plays an integral part in the belief system of several cultures—basically in the East and particularly, at present, in Tibet. In truth, the importance of Shambhala should be considered not on how, or where, or even z/it exists, but, rather, upon the role that it plays in relation to its effect on hum an learning. In this regard, if we are able to shift our emphasis from

legendary speculation to something of actual pragmatic and beneficial value, we would be in a better position to arrive at some meaningful knowledge that can be applied to our lives and which can help us to better understand the legendary importance of its existence. In other words, if we emphasize the reason of its importance or existence, then the how and where will assume a secondary, and in some cases, a non-essential role.

M any centuries ago there appeared in India the Kalachakra teachings w hich are said to have originated in Shambhala. More recently in history, several hundred years later, the Kalachakra was reintroduced into Tibetan Buddhism and has become an integral part of its teachings. The original idea that it originated in Shambhala is still intact. It is interesting to note that between its first appearance in India and its second appearance in Tibet, there were a few additions to the teachings that possibly lend credence to a place of common origin. If we look at these additions philosophically, we will discover that elements of Persian and pre-Christian Gnosticism were introduced into the already existing system. If nothing else, this introduction dem onstrates interaction betw een ancient civilizations.

Developing around the Tibetan form of the Kalachakra teachings we will find that the existence of Shambhala evolved in more detail. We have a lineage of Kings, and a description of the city and the surrounding terrain. We have all of the elements necessary to produce a physical reality, except for where it is.

But, the problem of Shambhala is far more complex than just finding its location, simply because until we discover the real reason for its existence, the where and how aspects will remain speculative and uncertain. W ithout attempting to understand the reason why it plays such an im portant role, we run the risk of becoming too emotionally involved in the imagining and fantasy elements, thereby slowing our search for its truth and reality.

Such is true w ith all legends. The farther back in time and the more remote the area, the greater the probability that fantastic myths are created, thereby obscuring the real truth. We m ust never forget that legend has truth in its foundation. But, the more exaggerated a

tru th becomes, the more the elements of sensationalism and fantasy manifest, adversely influencing people's beliefs. Perhaps if the real truth were known, the interest in such places would not be as great, thus m aking the real reasons behind the legends less effective.

Truth is simple and is only obscured by people who w ant to make more out of it than is actually there. Ironically, however, if such people really understood the truth in its simplicity, it could be far more inter­esting than any forced belief. As an example, the mystery surrounding California's M ount Shasta and Lemuria is exemplified by mysterious tunnels hidden beneath the earth. But, for those people who live near M ount Shasta, such tunnels are not mysterious, or even interesting, simply because M ount Shasta is a volcano, complete w ith a network of tunnels formed by previous volcanic activity. These tunnels can be explored by anyone w ho so desires.

In summation, we can see that legends can have diametrically opposed effects upon people, depending upon individual concerns. Legends can be merely entertaining; they can lead people on fantast­ical trips of sensationalistic speculation; they can close people off to a belief in any real existence; or they can be used as a viable source to find real meaning and intent in the discovery of Truth. In our examples of France and Shambhala (regardless of a belief in a physical or superphysical existence), an interest in France will take us to the history books, and an interest in Shambhala and the reasons for its existence can take us to the mysteries deep w ithin ourselves to assist in our quest for the acquisition of mystical knowledge.

Concepts Regarding Reincarnation

T h e topic about which I am going to speak is quite complex but is intended to offer you different perspectives on the subject of reincarnation, which you may wish to think about over the next few days, months, or years. This technique of exploring a subject follows very closely the convocation talks and teachings of ancient and traditional Rosicrucianism. As you probably know, the m onographs are a 20th century contribu tion to the Rosicrucian studies. Prior to that time, and even in this cycle of the 20th century, important Rosicrucian knowledge was transmitted in ways other than the monographs. Prior to that, Rosicrucians relied upon the two following methods:

1. A personal interpretation of symbols and allegories of the Order through attunem ent and association w ith the Order;

2. Through the means of convocations and instruction from a teacher who, by the way, did not dictate dogma, but rather made suggestions and insisted upon the students' self-reliance to develop themselves. In mysticism, this is an effective tool for teaching and experiencing, as it develops free thinkers. On the other hand, it also contributes to heresies, as past history will tell us. But all in all it gives us today's Rosicrucianism.

January 1st is the time of year when m any people—not all but m any—make New Year's resolutions to begin the new cycle, the new year. We Rosicrucians are quite familiar w ith cycles, and therefore I ask you: "Can you think of anything existing, w hether materially, psychically, or spiritually, which does not exist in cycles?"

Reincarnation is a cycle—cycles of life—but what do we think of when we bring up the subject of reincarnation? I am sure each one of you has thought about it in some way and each one of you has your own particular viewpoint ranging all the way from outright belief in reincarnation to no belief at all in reincarnation. That is quite all right. The point is, people have thought about the concept, and they have many different ideas about reincarnation when the subject is discussed.

Often people are curious about who they were in a previous incarnation, or w ho they might be in some future incarnation. And then there are the doctrines of cause and effect, the doctrines of Karma that go with the subject of reincarnation, ideas about creating our future and how w hat we do is going to determine our future. Many people have thought about these subjects extensively.

But there is another question that I think many people have not really considered at all, and that is the question: Is there a cycle of reincarnation of thoughts and experiences w hich is independent of anyone's particular personality?

Maybe we can approach the question by considering the popular subject of hypnotic regression. I think most everyone is familiar with this subject, and there have been many books and articles written about hypnotic regression. In fact, some of the more extraordinary cases of hypnotic regression include people who, w hen apparently taken to previous centuries, actually spoke an archaic form of a foreign language which they had no knowledge of in this incarnation, and described experiences w hich, w hen checked by historians, accurately detailed w hat had happened or probably happened.

Several years ago I had some interest in hypnotic regression, and just for my own experience I went to a hypnotist, who is not a member of the Order, just to try to experience for myself what this is all about. Interestingly, as a result of the session, which cost $30, the individual determ ined my personality in previous incarnations, or actually two personalities in two previous incarnations. The hypnotist referred to historic figures in both incarnations, but unfortunately, was not all that familiar with the history of that time, and both of those historical figures lived at the same time!

I know I am one person right now, and I think that each one of you here is one person. Maybe 200 or 300 years ago (and I do not feel things have changed too drastically in that period of time) each person living at that time was one person as well. But it brought up an interesting thought, because in my own studies I have been interested in both these individuals, both of them being philosophers; and I felt an attunem ent w ith their lives and their philosophies.' As this came out, it caused me to look differently at the subject of reincarnation. Is it not possible that an individual can be taken through some form of hypnotic regression, where it is not a regression into the personalities and past lives of other people, but where they have attuned to something that occurred in a previous period of time?

In the studies of the Order, we teach about the subject of Assumption. Thus there could be a close relationship to that type of experience. Furthermore, Rosicrucians and mystics are usually more aware of these other forms of manifestation, w hereas some people who focus only on the one subject might experience limitations. Another interesting point is that many people, w hen they identify with previous incarnations, usually identify with somebody who is well known or famous. I rather think that people who become famous achieve this status because they are in the right place at the right time. I personally know some individuals whom I would consider to be very advanced mystics, very advanced soul personalities, but who are not famous and will probably never be famous. One in particular I am thinking of happens to be an elderly Australian Aborigine who lives in the middle of the desert, and the wisdom that this person has is remarkable. But this person is not considered famous.

So we need to change our outlook on w ho we were and con­centrate instead more on what we accomplished. And we should not measure fame, because that is an attributed aspect of life, but measure one's contribution, because everyone has an important contribution to make to life. And, of course, by being mystics we are more than just students of mysticism. We know that the purity, the oneness, and the excellence of the Cosmic is inherent within each one of us equally. In a sense, it is situations which make us "unequal".

This brings up an interesting topic, and that is the egregore, or created reality. We all create our realities. In both our physical and psychic lives we create those conditions we want to create. Our recog­nition of this is the secret to understanding mysticism, and then we should work together to bring about the necessary conditions and in so doing create an environment. Each person has his or her own reality, and we also all work together to bring about a larger reality. We associate with people who in a sense share that reality, and from a total world perspective, all of hum anity has created a certain type of reality. This is called an egregore. In the more mystical realms, among those people who are more spiritually minded, we are also at the same time creating our realities, and hopefully we do create those realities. That is w hat Rosicrucianism is trying to do, so that we can learn more about the actuality of the universe.

In the context of this discourse, 1 am using Rosicrucian terminology with which you are familiar and thus we can communicate w ith each other. But let's say you are at home and go across the street to a neighbor you may never have m et before, and speak about mystical subjects. It does not always work. Of course, if your neighbor is also a Rosicrucian, then there will be an immediate rapport w hen talking about certain basic mystical concepts.

And this also applies to the concept of egrtgore, which is a very important idea. We should always know that we are forever creating our realities; we are changing; and through the process of growth and looking at life from the perspective of love, understanding, and tolerance of the attributes that are ascribed to the mystic in the subject of mysticism, we develop a strength of growing.

I am sure each one of us, after becoming a m em ber of the Order, has felt at one time or another that he or she has been a Rosicrucian before. Why is this? It is because we actually were Rosicrucians before? At different periods of time, it reawakened within those individualsa purpose to fulfill.

Let us take ourselves way back in history to the beginning of the Order and think about the m em bers and what they were trying to do and accomplish at that time. I think w hat we might discover is

that the synchronicity of what brings people together today is not necessarily related to personal reincarnation experiences. And if this concept, this nebulous thing of which we speak, is a reality, is this not a form of reincarnation but without personality? The ideals, the motion or movement of achieving passed on through centuries from a lofty spiritual plane of manifestation reaches down, and it touches those people w ho are attuning or striving toward such ideals. They are being guided and inspired by that tradition.

There is more truth in this concept than may be apparent. O ur Rosicrucian ancestors knew w hat they were doing and had clear direction on what was intended to occur well into the future; and various physical clues can be attributed to and associated w ith this concept. This is one of the reasons why it is extremely important that we preserve and perpetuate our traditions.

Just as a m atter of interest, here is something for you to think about; What would happen if those unnamed personalities, who are perhaps without fame in history books but who have nevertheless contributed greatly to the egregore of our movement by participating in the creation of that movement and set into motion a reincarnation of thought and action, also began to reincarnate to personality at the same time?

Our message is certain: Be clear and serve the mission. It is our responsibility to establish that which was set in motion long ago. What we do is not arbitrary, and as time progresses the cloud of secrecy and the mystery that sometimes surrounds Rosicrucianism will clear away.

Our Purpose Is Service

W h a t each one of us does indi­vidually is our own personal business and we will be directed in our endeavors by conscience, but our purpose here is to discuss how our actions apply to Rosicrucianism. Rosicrucian choices, our choices, are collective.

Like it or not, we are presently in a situation in which the world situation is changing rapidly—not only for societies and cultures, but for Rosicrucianism itself. In turn, we must respond to what is needed based on our spiritual principles. There is no other choice—no other acceptable action.

For years, because of social, economic, and political changes, we have found the outer (material) aspect of Rosicrucian organizations in financial hardship, confronted by apparently declining membership. Many other organizations and businesses dealing with issues of worldly concern face the same problems, and their circumstances concern us as well. In the past, much of the activity of the esoteric Orders have been directed toward improving their financial situation through increasing dues and by increasing membership through extroverted advertising. These approaches are fine and they offer tem porary solutions. But they are not long-term solutions to our problems.

The solutions lie in realizing, recognizing, and remembering our purpose, by exemplifying the spiritual values entrusted, and in ensuring a quality of action. This is an opportunity afforded us, and this is what we are doing at present.

Placing our sights on the work of Service to Light and humanity, and approaching all other aspects of a physical organization from a spiritual perspective is common sense and sound business practice. But these represent our worldly and outer objectives and goals.

Other opportunities are opening up to us at an astonishing rate (I use the word ''astonishing'' in a positive sense). We are starting to reap the effects of the causes induced over the past few years. Using our spiritual heritage as a base, we have begun working on higher planes of manifestation, on mystical plans—not psychic, but mystical. We are creating conditions which bring us the opportunities necessary to accomplish w hat we need to accomplish.

O ur purpose is Service. Our tools are the principles that we ail know and understand w ithin our hearts. But, more than that is the application of those principles to all aspects of our lives. Frater Ralph Lewis, past Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order, was very militant in this regard. He stated that the purpose of Rosicrucianism is to develop and instill w ithin each individual a living philosophy, and to make our mysticism pragmatic.

Mysticism manifests on all levels of existence. We have before us a means by which we can work toward unification through peace and culture, through recognizing the spiritual values inherent in all cultures and in all peoples.

We have attracted the attention of age old metaphysical and mystical systems from other cultures and they are looking for our support and help. These systems are compatible w ith our Rosicrucian traditions and heritage.

The work by our members on a spiritual level, manifesting in practical application, has had an impact on the legal systems of various countries. Rosicrucianism is highly respected and regarded, and we are often sought out to help find solutions to given problems. Our work is recognized.

We have been assisting our m em bers and we have produced programs to help individuals learn more about financial responsibility to leam for themselves and apply from their own initiative and efforts those concerns of a m undane and financial nature. This is all based upon spiritual principles applied to m undane levels. And m any more things are being done. There are many more opportunities.

We are afforded opportunities in our stated purpose of Service. Why is this true? We have started this mission before on the development

of the evolution of the egr&gore of our Order. It started its development not only on a physical plane, but on the mystical. We have created conditions in which we reap the rewards. But, the rewards are not gifts of a process that just allow us to stand idly by. The rewards provide the opportunity to work toward a common goal to achieve an enlightenment for all humanity. And it is work.

There are more things working against us than there are things to accomplish. But, we have our spiritual values and principles, and they have been developed and m olded into a new birth, into a Rosicrucian renaissance—a renaissance that is not just going to manifest in the future, but is already manifesting. It has not made our lives easier; it has made life more difficult. But all of us, upon signing our oaths, upon becoming members of the CR+C, have freely given of ourselves to accomplish these ends in a responsible fashion and to build and recognize our opportunities. We have done this. Again, it is just a beginning.

How Do We Truly Serve?

It seems ironic that even in some of the most advanced societies there exist people who are unable to care for themselves. I am not referring, in this instance, to individuals w ho are physically or mentally handicapped, or to those who have no control or direction over their lives. I am referring instead to individuals who have either initially chosen to live a lifestyle that substantially deviates from society's "norm," or who have seemingly become "victims" of the society in which they live.

In all instances, we, as students of mysticism, will recognize (or th ink that we recognize) that all people are responsible for creating their own circumstances. That is, each individual has created his or her own immediate situation based upon previous actions either in this lifetime or in a past incarnation. Thus, we can effectively debate the excuse often given for "victims of society" because at some point in time a choice was made that resulted in the present situation. To individuals w ho have a well-developed sense of knowledge and wisdom, it is apparent that people sometimes make unfortunate choices not based on any responsible and knowledgeable decision but as the result of ignorance or an ignorant act. In other words, the person did not realize the consequences of such an act which may have already manifested in an undesirable situation or will do so in the future.

The term that we use to describe this sequence of causal acts and the resulting effects is “karma." How often have we either heard or used the phrase, “That person is in trouble because he has bad karma," or, "She got the promotion because she chalked up some good karma points"? By making such statements, what are we actually

saying? Are we acting out of knowledge and wisdom by saying or thinking such things? Or, are we, ourselves, creating an ignorant act that will have effects upon us at a later time?

In writing this article, my main concern is not w ith the helpless, or those who drift without any apparent direction in life, or even with those who have chosen, consciously or unconsciously, to be the outcasts ("victims") of society. My main concern here is with those individuals who use their understanding of karma (what they consider it to be)—in an attempt to explain a given situation. Often these are the individuals who are trying to better society, to help those who are less fortunate. These are the individuals who have chosen to serve.

How does our knowledge of karma, our personal understanding of that concept affect our service to humanity? In answering this question, perhaps we should paraphrase the old cliche, “The more we learn, the less we know." After all, in acquiring knowledge, as soon as we find an answer to one question, a multiplicity of other questions will follow. Such is the nature of learning. This is how we evolve in our understanding.

Karma explains so much; it is an answ er in itself. It opens doors that, w ith a little effort on our part, will explain an entire new dimension of learning.

But it is also a question because it does open doors. And for those individuals who are not looking for pat or simple phrases to explain circumstances, karma will be seen, not as an end, but as a m eans—a tool to be applied in finding solutions.

W hat, then, is karma? Can we truly think of karma as being good or bad? W hat of those individuals who shrug off an explanation by saying that such-and-such occurred because of bad karma? Are such "answers" truly beneficial to humanity?

Persons w ho even loosely refer to the term karm a in their conversations demonstrate a degree of knowledge that is essential to understanding what true service actually means. A familiarity with the term will hopefully imply a familiarity with the concept—and, even an acceptance of its doctrine. But if our acquisition of knowledge about karma stops at this point, then no wisdom has been acquired.

We must then ask if such persons can truly help others, or merely think that they can.

It is simple for persons who do not make the important con­nection between their present circumstances and their past actions to live their lives without really showing any concern for issues that relate to the welfare of others. However, w hen that connection between past actions and present circumstances is understood, we will find a greater complexity of variables that need to be responsibly weighed and considered before any true service can be accomplished. In other words, unless we apply our learning w ith dedicated respons­ibility, we run the risk of doing more harm than good. It then becomes apparent that both knowledge and wisdom m ust be utilized as our actions produce more widespread and lasting effects. Perhaps persons acting out of ignorance willingly affect themselves to no great extent. But knowledgeable persons acting without wisdom produce a much w ider sphere of influence that can adversely affect others, in addition to themselves.

How are we to view karma in this light? Let us interpret karma in three different ways. First, let us think of karma as being a positive attribute in the service of others. Within this definition of karma we find people w ho think and act out of altruistic motives, that is, people who are devoted to the well-being of those around them . These individuals want to promote the greatest good for the greatest possible num ber of people. They may be involved in distributing food to the starving masses around the world, and, w hen doing so, demonstrate that some people in the world really care. Perhaps we can say such devoted individuals are creating good karma.

Secondly, let us consider karma in a negative connotation, such as with people who are acting out of purely selfish motives. An example would be those people who try to discredit others so as to give credit to themselves. Finally, let us also consider karma from a neutral position which is neither positive nor negative, good nor bad.

In the first instance, I think that we would all agree that the act of giving food to starving people is not only noble, but vitally important- But an important principle lies hidden here. Let us say that

the persons donating food are doing so either because it makes them feel good, or simply because they know that there are hungry people, and the act of giving is just that—an act existing without any thought behind it. W hat if these hum anitarians actually contribute to the weaknesses of others by acting in such a way that the recipients do not help themselves? Does the act then remain altruistic and positive, or has it become selfish and negative, either consciously because the giver feels guilty and wants to remove that guilt, or unconsciously through ignorance of understanding the true situation which may not be apparent w ithout applying knowledge and understanding?

Perhaps we can see that our altruistic, positive example has become transform ed into our second instance of karm a—that of selfishness and negativity in the example of doing only to remove guilt. Even the person acting unconsciously out of ignorance, though w ith noble purpose, has a problem. For example, let us consider a situation that has most likely happened to all of us at some point in time. Remember the last time you were stopped on the street by an individual who, by his appearance, would be considered by some to be a derelict. This person, perhaps, asked for money so he could buy food, but our impression was that he really wanted alcohol. We were in a situation where we were asked for help. W hat did we do and w hat did we feel?

Did we ignore this person? Did we go through the motions of giving money just to be rid of him and to alleviate any discomfort we may have felt? Did we refuse on the prem ise that the money would probably be misspent and we could not really help him by supporting his alcoholism? Did we perhaps even erroneously think that by contributing we would be taking on his karma? Or, did we give the money thinking that what he did w ith it was his problem? And, finally, did we either give money or refuse assistance because of a true and sincere feeling of compassion for the other person? Only you know w hat you truly felt.

Unfortunately, certain people would use such a situation to their own advantage, that is, to ridicule another who is less fortunate so as to build a false sense of their own self-esteem. Ironically, such people

are often quick to point out what appear to be faults and acts of selfishness in others. "What good is your education, your efforts to achieve success, and your success unless you give your money to me so / can feed the starving?" Verily, are our attempts to better ourselves simply selfish acts? Does not the process of self-concern and self­betterm ent create an environm ent that allows the opportunity to serve more effectively? If such an attitude is held by an individual, does not the seemingly selfish act become a selfless act? Perhaps we don't consciously give in a manner that others expect us to, but maybe our wisdom has transcended the normal understanding held by others. If this is true, does not the seemingly selfish act become an altruistic one? Even further, is it really our acquired wisdom which causes us to act in a m anner that we do?

If I might be allowed to relate a personal experience, a few years ago, when I was in India, I spent several days in Bodh Gaya, the place w here the Buddha attained enlightenment. Literally hundreds of lepers lined the streets of this small town begging for money so they could survive. I observed many different attitudes from different people. Some threw coins at locations where it would be extremely difficult for the recipients to reach them, thereby attempting to make a joke of the situation. Some individuals really tried to help by giving coins, but you could tell by their faces that they knew the giving was futile because there were so many lepers and not enough money. And some simply ignored those who were begging.

f asked myself at the time as I am asking you now: Which act did the most good? I think that if we tried to answer this question, or tried to judge another's motive, we would become lost in an eternal philosophical debate that will never have an appropriate and final answer. Therefore, we must find another solution.

The tem porary solution that I found was not in anything that I could give, but rather in what I was given. I distinctly rem ember the faces of three individuals w ith leprosy. They gave more to me than I could ever give to them. They are the authors of this message in that they inspired this feeble attem pt to think about and to express their wisdom.

So, how do we truly serve? Who is really serving? Is service an act? Or, is it something else? Perhaps in the consideration of karma, the third instance of neutrality will afford us an answer. Karma is simply cause and effect. It is neither good nor bad, but merely neutral. It is only a situation created by an act made by one individual or by many. If we view karma in this light, perhaps we will discover that acts considered in a purely physical m anner are truly secondary to the true acts of motive and attitude. The reasons behind w hy we give or do something will create and form our true state of affairs which is not m easured in our physical state of being or environment. It is not m easured by our degree of mastership or attainment, but by our spirituality. Spirituality is not measured by appearance, environment, or attainment. It simply knows nothing but itself because it is all that truly exists. It is true that there are physical laws of cause and effect which we can also call karma, but the true essence of karma transcends all of that. With the proper attitude and motive developed from within, with returns to that which is within, and we can realize that everyone and all things are of perfection.

Again, how can we truly be of service? Service, in a sense, is related to morality, to notions of good and bad as related to the welfare of society. In this way, we can have true service and acts of service. Acts of service can be either sincere or insincere, of which the ultimate outcome in either instance may be good or bad, detrimental or helpful, depending upon the variables of purpose, motive, and attitude. True service, then, consists of those variables of purpose, motive, and attitude which are the source and essence of acts. To truly be of service, to truly understand karma, perhaps we should concentrate our efforts on the spirituality within, and apply our acquired wisdom so as to manifest as the foundation of whatever act we choose to perform.

We do not have to look long and hard to discover that Rosi­crucianism is based upon and teaches inherent wisdom and its application. We can be of true service by attuning to that essence and simply manifesting it in our beings because it is really knowledge and understanding that is needed in today's world.

Awakened Attitude

T h e Confraternity of the Rose Cross (CR+C], is a school of mysticism. Its aim and purpose is to offer a system of study to people who have felt an urge from within to consciously advance themselves along the path of spiritual evolution.

We at CR+C do not judge the potential member's prior attainment w hen he or she applies for membership. Nor do we, at any time, make any evaluation of the individual's advancement during this membership. Our applications for membership only test the applicants to determ ine if they sincerely wish to develop the inner urge for the betterm ent of themselves and of humanity. After passing this test, the students of Rosicrucianism are offered a system of study through the monographs, and also afforded the opportunity to manifest their learning at both an objective and esoteric level through the medium of our local groups.

In following the principles of true esotericism, we recognize that all attainment must be earned by the individuals through their own sincerity and commitments. The gift of enlightenment is the result of the work of the student through his or her own efforts. What is important is the student's own application of the principles taught in the monographs as realized from within, from the Path of the Heart—not how well the student may recite the words and principles contained in the teachings.

Once the students have developed the attribute of working with their own inner commitments, our teachings then become a valuable tool and guide in assisting such persons to develop their spirituality. On the other hand, the teachings can also assist individuals who feel the inner urge but who have yet to realize or manifest its attributes. The subtle point w hich serves to distinguish betw een the two approaches, and, at the same time, unifies them, is sincerity.

Those of us who demonstrate sincerity have developed within ourselves an innate quality that serves as a guide to assist in the natural and inevitable evolution of our spiritual aspects in accordance w ith the harmonious nature of Being. We are truly free agents, for we have felt the attunem ent process and are naturally acting with responsibility to learn and apply what is felt to our conscious minds.

As this aw areness m atures through our efforts, we sense a "higher" form of mind, a different type of awareness, a different manifested form of logical analysis that is the unification of our inner and outer natures, which creates a third attribute. This third attribute manifests as a means, a system, which can be utilized to attain an enlightened state. This system may be called "responsible mysticism." This form of mysticism excludes phenomenalism, sensationalism, and fantasy. It includes proper perspective, understanding, and tru ly practical application.

Students w ho lack sincerity in their approach will not dem on­strate the qualities just mentioned. This results in the distinction of our subtle point. However, the person who has, in some way, felt the inner urge but does not fully understand or objectify it will find value in Rosicrucian teachings. Through the seriousness of study, they will find a system which unifies the feelings and realizations to the extent that sincerity, is developed as a natural process. But, for this to occur, receptivity to the harmonizing nature of the Cosmic and of mysticism m ust be inherent w ithin us.

CR+ C is not attractive to students who, in some manner, do not exhibit this trait. Rather, Rosicrucianism does attract many, different types of individuals—varying from the enlightened who are applying their wisdom and knowledge for the benefit of others; to the seekers who are learning to realize or awaken; and to the immature, who have chosen not to synthesize their feelings and learning because of, perhaps, ulterior motives which consist of control, manipulation, and the false sense of power that comes with little understanding. People who fall into this last category do not stay long with the Order. If by chance they do, it soon becomes apparent that they are attempting to use the O rder to gain something it will not provide.

By considering w hat has been said up to this point, we can perceive another subtle distinction—that is, the difference between being spiritual and thinking that we are spiritual. Being spiritual is a natural process of attunem ent which manifests a combination of processes in our lives in an applicable way with benefit to all beings. Thinking that we are spiritual may incorporate thoughts and actions similar to those of spirituality, but w ithout the substance of true sincerity behind it. Although we may be sincere in what we do, we are not sincere in relationship to the harmonizing principle of the Cosmic.

The student w ho synthesizes and applies understands those subtleties well. But, the aspiring seeker who is learning to awaken has only a vague understanding at best. He or she must be very cautious in their actions and thoughts and m ust develop a balance between the emotions and the intellect. They m ust be careful not to get caught up in the mystification of emotionality and call it mysticism. At the same time, they must not objectify or externalize that which comes from within and give it either a merely intellectual or abstract reality.

We can readily see that a sincere study of mysticism is not as easy as some seem to think. We cannot m erely read a book on the subject or even pursue a course of study and thereby become an ''expert" on mysticism. To truly become a mystic, we m ust develop and evolve our innate qualities, part of which constitute our person­ality, and thereby create an attitude conducive to understanding and applying mystical ideals. In other words, books or courses may give us the knowledge of mystical principles, but it is our inner awakening that gives us the wisdom to become true mystics. This awakening involves an [109] inner commitment and devotion to the duty of truly wanting to face and surpass our limitations for a "higher" cause.

The whole point of our concern with mystical attainment lies in the preparation of developing an awakened attitude. Psychic development does not constitute such a state, as it is more appropriately applied as a tool after realization. This also pertains to contacts w ith "Masters." This ideal can only be truly understood after our attitude has been awakened through true sincerity and after we have begun to actively apply our inner commitment and to integrate it into our worldly affairs.

About the Author

G a ry Lee Stew art was born on February 26, 1953, in Stockton, California. He received his Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy from Fresno State University, California and was later accepted into a Master of Letters program for the University of Aberdeen, Scotland, College of Metaphysics and Logic. It was after being accepted into this program that he decided not to continue his formal education and subsequently returned to California.

Having been fascinated by the art of mysticism as an intuitive philosophy for most of his life, his investigations led him to an esoteric "affiliation" in Belgium in 1971 and again to affiliate w ith the Rosicrucian Order in 1975. He volunteered his services to a local Rosicrucian group and eventually sought employment at the cor­porate headquarters in San Jose. There, he soon became an official representative, traveling throughout the U nited Sates addressing groups of Rosicrucian students, as well as members of the public on subjects including m ysticism , philosophy, m etaphysics and Rosicrucianism. He also created and directed the Historical Research Council, which purpose was to preserve and protect our Rosicrucian heritage through m em ber research projects. Gary Stewart was appointed Grand M aster of the English speaking jurisdiction in 1985 and was elected Vice-President to the Board of Directors in 1986.

Prior to his death in January 1987, through a process of trial, testing and Initiation, the previous Imperator Ralph M Lewis had selected Gary L Stewart as his successor for this lifetime responsibility. His ritualistic installation took place on M arch 20, 1987, in San Jose, California.

Gary L Stewart is the Imperator of the Confraternity of the Rose Cross |CR+C], Knight Com m ander of the O rder of the Militia Crucifera Evangelica, and Sovereign Grand M aster of The British M artinist Order. He continues to fulfill the ancient responsibilities of his office to preserve, protect and perpetuate the Rosicrucian traditions and teachings.

The OMCE and CR+C are traditional, mystical and fraternal Orders dedicated to

applying the principles of mysticism in a pragmatic fashion for the purpose of the collective evolution of humanity.

We can be reached at the local addresses listed on an insert attached. Should an insert be unavailable,

please direct your inquiries to:

O rder of th e M ilitia C rucifera Evangelica (OMCE)PO Box 226323

Dallas, TX 75222-6323 USA

C o n fra te rn ity of the Rose Cross (CR + C)PO Box 471

Carnegie, PA 15106-0471 USA

G ary L Ste w a r t is the Im perator of the C o nfratern ity of the Rose Cross (CR+C), Knight Com m ander of the O rder of the M ilitia Crucifera Evangelica, and Sovereign G rand Master of The British M artinist Order. He continues to fulfil) the ancient responsibilities of his office to preserve, protect and perpetuate the Rosicrucian traditions and teachings.