The 7 Portals of the Spirit. Akron Frey
Читать онлайн книгу.
that we repress in the course of our lives, the will to return into the blessed land, in which human beings construct their gods. Behind this however does not hide the fusion with, – and the return to – the divine origins but the egoistic claim to evolve from within oneself in a creative way and, in a sense, be godlike. The resulting conclusion is obvious: These images divert from reality – this collective God cannot help us, on the contrary, he strengthens and patronizes us in our illusion ...
... a divine phantom that – in a way – bites its own bottom?
God is an image, thought up by priests, which helps us to deal with the results of our own acquisitions. Somehow this is about assigning ourselves to the task that helps us to find God or the meaning of life within the consequences of our deeds. That is why this picture always points back to it’s creator: Humanity …
You think that mankind has created God after their example?
Sure, because we only ever see what we want to see, and we perceive everything in the world exactly the same way our collectively minted consciousness forces us to interpret the things we see, to prevent them from transgressing the borders of our common perception. Even worse: We only see the association with our collective thinking-structures, which we have evoked from within our cradle and since then differentiated and cultivated, confirmed by everything. Actually everything we see is nothing else but a brew mixed by electric impulses in our brain, that force us to relate to something so that we at least have two points between which we can navigate inside of his mechanisms. Just imagine our inner position from where we perceive the world, would displace itself, then the whole attention towards our reality would collapse, and then our whole civilization would vanish instantly.
But where is the origin of the impulse that causes the need to create such an image?
Within the collective intention itself! We form realities from within our spiritual force and our common imagination, in which we interact and therefore there’s need of an origin to which we can relate within our dual conception, so that we are not able to notice that all our images flow from within ourselves and we name this origin „God“. That’s the trick …
... the God-trick?
The collective intention is the impulse, to construct a reachable symbol from the fathomless numinous creation and place this self-created image like a mirror in front of us so that we can believe in it.
Does that mean that humanity is its own creator?
You are absolutely right! The first human beings had to – in a manner of speaking – invent their civilization first and the question, how this world could have come into being, helped them to find the answer, in the way they observed it. Our own assessment of this world out there in turn influenced the image they created from themselves, because we can only feel ourselves through our intuition, which is again initiated from the outside world. And through this perpetual interaction between the self-image and the outside world, they constructed their personal history.
The self image that reveals itself to us in our mirror helps us to trust the God who is looking back at us through the reflection?
Yes. As long as we do not realize that we ourselves are the ones who create the inventories of our symbolisms, we can not be able to see the fact that we in a way have become the filling of our own perception, and on this belief we can depend on. We see ourselves standing at the windows of our cerebrum staring out at the world through our eyes, but what we see is actually nothing else than a kind of formatted landscape out of our collective inventory.
Did I understand you correctly? The all-embracing frame which holds everything together is our faith?
To define this picture as what we want it to be a frame is necessary, and this frame consists of the many individual egos, through which we force each other to keep this self created image together.
And why do we have to keep this image together? Would the world break apart if we didn’t?
It is not the world that would break apart without a frame, for such a world could never have existed. It is the construction of our ego that always builds a controlled reality, which would collapse if we would suddenly have the idea of not believing in our self constructed world image any more.
Then our models would be nothing but a farce …?
In a sense, yes. Because we don’t know that reality on the outside in the way we know it was created by our collective creativity, so we could have something within our consciousness that we constructed, which we are able to control and therefore we really believe that the outer world is completely autonomous from our inner perception ...
... and every form of searching for God is a joke?
At least one that is to be taken very seriously, for this God is in fact the self-made life-goal of humanity within our minds! Let us go back in time: At the very beginning of mankind there was no God – just a few tools of consciousness, which variated us from animals and using them we were to carve our worldview out of eternity. This wish we have fulfilled ourselves, for these self fulfilled wishes are the foundation of that what we relate to and we have expanded them into gigantic cathedrals of knowledge within which those billions of priests and scientists are busy constantly confirming and explain our monuments. Our whole progress is nothing but a development of images that we ourselves have constructed and which fulfill themselves within the collective capacity of consciousness.
But what about spiritual realization? And where would be the solution?
Maybe this is all about simply accepting the fact that the way we suffer when we proceed with the endless conflict we have with each other, is the price we have to pay for wanting to control our lives. There is no return from this hamster-wheel. Therefore there’s no point in the question what would be if it all were different. Maybe we should ask ourselves the following question: “How should we understand the problems in our world as long as we fail to notice that these problems lie within ourselves?”
So, there is no paradise?
What for? Paradise is nothing worth achieving for a human nature, foreseen from the perspective of our ego, there is nothing to strife for. Human evolution originates in social and civil control, to let the natural instincts be accompanied by a socialized pendant, and this control is the framework around which the structure of every civilization winds itself – and collapses from time to time. Therefore it makes no sense for the magical person to repress or overcome control, he rather has to study the social mechanisms closely and ask the price one has to pay for this control. Like I said before: There is no escape from this dual trap. These delusions always lead to destruction and total breakdowns, onto which new orders install themselves. This is the fundament of human development.
What about higher ambitions that human beings long for? Don’t we need a specific aim ... a deeper truth?
As long as we perpetually try to enforce clarity we are delivered victims to the force of our intellect. For as long as our intellect is only able to perceive life through the limited forms and shapes within the dimensions of our common way of perception which he can comprehend, the strife for clarity or a deeper truth is, seen from an objective point of view, the illusion to prefer our imagination to eternity and believe in it. That is why every kind of clarity is threatening to our existence, for it observes and verifies only small fractions out of a whole, isolates them and evaluates them as if they were everything. Our „controlled“ models are a trick that only works because we don’t see through it.
Why do human beings even need models?
Because we are only able to see the world the way we experience it through our structures of thought, we first of all have to get an impression of our way of thinking. Actually models are for collecting our focused thoughts around one center so that we have a common foundation that is the precondition for every kind of interaction, in a manner of speaking, a description of the world, so that we can have philosophic conversations about it …
I understand ... models that sustain reality are actually diverting from what is real?
If