Thanks Kern. I think a lot of people like the musical technique. I particularly like listening to “My Sweet Lord” by Lennon. And a friend tells me one of his favorite times to worship is when he’s driving his pickup and listening to Enya.
Preview: a read-only copy of the forum. To post or reply, use the current forum.
Worship as an Individual Experience
68 posts · 7 participants · started Jan 7, 2018, 9:50 PM
It was good to review the differences between prayer and worship. One of my favorite lines from your quotes is, “But in practical religious experience there exists no reason why prayer should not be addressed to God the Father as a part of true worship.” In other words, we don’t really need to make efforts to separate the two – God will figure that out for us.
Exactly. In fact, we’re told that our minds can rarely become highly conscious of true worship because it takes place on superconscious levels (5:3.7). That’s the level we’re supposed to strive for, but we don’t live there yet. It’s all about developing a worshipful attitude, because the ” . . . reflective powers of the mind are deepened and broadened . . .” by doing so. (102:4.5) And that’s what I call the gateway phenomenon. A worshipful attitude keeps the gateway to the soul opened by those two higher adjutants of worship and wisdom. The adjutant of wisdom is in intimate contact with the Holy Spirit, the supermind of the soul, and the Holy Spirit is in intimate contact with the Spirit of Truth who interprets the language of God to the meanings of man.
And because “…we simply worship God for what we comprehend him to be,” I believe it is important for us to understand the nature and attributes of God to the highest possible levels of our imaginations.
Yes, and that is why Jesus emphasized the importance of setting the creative imagination free (179:5.4), and why TUB tells us that the Adjuster communicates best in liberated but controlled channels of creative imagination (109:5.1). By controlled I believe they mean using the alter ego approach of direct person-to-person communication, regardless of ” . . . what we comprehend him to be . . .”
What is the problem with praying to a God whom you imagine to be another personality? The alter ego approach is about talking to another person whom you can relate to.
****
I’ve said quite clearly that I don’t think I’m all for the alter ego approach as described in the section of Paper 91 The Evolution of Prayer, Section 3 Prayer and the Alter Ego, which as far as my searches have been able to discover are the only places in the book where the alter ego is mentioned. As I’ve stated more than once in this thread, I was simply taking it as a given in the spiritual life and was dealing with other matters. As also mentioned before, even faith–the very crux of eternal survival–can have serious problems associated with it (fanaticism, presumption, etc.) so why should we expect the alter ego approach to prayer to be immune from the possibility of abuse and misunderstanding?
I’m quite sure the paper is also about worship and communion.
*****
It certainly does include elements on worship, communion, and mysticism. Nonetheless, what I said was that its focus was on prayer and that is plenty accurate enough regarding thrust of the paper as a whole, esp. as it pertains to the point of this thread. Both the content of the section on the alter ego and its title could not be more explicit in about having prayer as their primary focus .
. . . so why should we expect the alter ego approach to prayer to be immune from the possibility of abuse and misunderstanding?
Oh for sure. There are monstrous problems with it when the approach is directed toward the subconscious rather than the superconscious. Just like any other form of mysticism, there are those who are directionally confused. Channeling the subconscious alter ego has been a problem for eons. But that’s not what we’re talking about here. We’re talking about prayer, which is supposed to have one dominate direction, as opposed to mysticism which can go in either direction . . . hence the confusion and potential abuse.
I guess I’m going to have to clarify what I just wrote in my last panel because I wasn’t clear. We know that prayer can entice the mind to look in both directions for help, but it is not looking for the alter ego in both directions. The alter ego TUB is talking about only lives in the superconscious.
In regards to the alter ego approach, it’s important to realize that this is a conversational approach to Deity. I will agree that initially these conversations can be rather childish, but what makes them work is that they are childlike. A childlike approach to prayer provides the proper attitude which is a parent-child, creature-Creator, son-Father attitude. Those who are turned off by the alter ego approach because it seems childish might try to consider its childlikeness, if that’s even a word.
We know that the attitude of prayer is its most important aspect. God listens to the soul’s attitude rather than the words (91:8.12). This is why the attitude of thankfulness is so helpful. Gratitude is an acknowledgement of the gift. Actually, the many gifts we receive from God: faith, insight, salvation, sonship, the Adjuster and life itself, to mention a few.
We’re also told that no one gets into the kingdom without childlike trust (140:10.4). The kingdom is within us (170:1.13), it is in the soul where the divine alter ego does his work. We’re also told our greatest adventure in this life is to strive for soul-consciousness, and with a wholehearted effort reach for the borderland of contact with the superconscious presence of the Adjuster, our divine alter ego (196:3.34). Such an adventure begins with a conversation, a dialogue, a fellowship. God will foster that dialogue, regardless of how primitive it may be, because it has potential value, and value depends upon relationships (100:3.5). So, there’s no shame in having just a little talk with your Father.
91:1.4 Prayer is only monologuous in the most primitive type of mind.
123:3.6 During this year Joseph and Mary had trouble with Jesus about his prayers. He insisted on talking to his heavenly Father much as he would talk to Joseph, his earthly father. This departure from the more solemn and reverent modes of communication with Deity was a bit disconcerting to his parents, especially to his mother, but there was no persuading him to change; he would say his prayers just as he had been taught, after which he insisted on having “just a little talk with my Father in heaven.”
- Carl R wrote: Before I reply to Bonita, can anyone still see my second post? For some strange reason it’s not showing up in my browser, though obviously Bonita read it.
I found 2 posts Carl – in the Spam folder. They were posted 8 Jan. I de-spammed them. See above.
Moderator-1
Thanks!
In regards to the alter ego approach, it’s important to realize that this is a conversational approach to Deity. I will agree that initially these conversations can be rather childish, but what makes them work is that they are childlike. A childlike approach to prayer provides the proper attitude which is a parent-child, creature-Creator, son-Father attitude. Those who are turned off by the alter ego approach because it seems childish might try to consider its childlikeness, if that’s even a word.
I don’t know of anyone in this thread who is turned off by the alter ego approach, but my street-psychology sense of most atheists is that when it comes to prayer they dislike the childlike aspects at least as much as the childish. Indeed, within the logic of their worldview there is no real distinction. This is true in a lot of spiritual circles as well. At least for most of his career (I haven’t checked recently) even Ken Wilber, the supposed arch-champion of integral spirituality, has had a condescending attitude toward childlike prayer and related spiritual practices and attitudes. One example of this is that, like many Buddhist intellectuals, he looks on Pure Land Buddhism as a kind of populist regression.
Anyway, I think all here agree that the most “effective technique for most practical purposes will be to revert to the concept of a near-by alter ego.”
**
Below are some additional thoughts in relation to this thread that are more general than my response to Bonita above:
**
As the quote I use in my signature line and similar ones in TUB indicate, there are things besides prayer that can profoundly enhance the experience of worship. Hence my mentioning hesychasm and Centering Prayer although, with more tweaking, things like pranayama, Taoist neigong, and zazen can do the job as well. If forced to chose between these and nature I’d chose nature, but these days pristine nature–and even the full glory of the night sky–is unavailable most of the time to many if not most people.
Besides helping with concentration, calm, and physical health if done correctly, after a few years of practice they us to be more considerably more open to the numinous qualities of experience. The feeling of the numinous is much like that which is engendered by being in nature, but by somewhat different means, then getting out for an extended stay in pristine nature. They do it by opening us to the “divine energies” referred to in this quote on Taoism:
94:6.8 (1034.3) That faith in the Absolute God is the source of that divine energy which will remake the world, and by which man ascends to spiritual union with Tao, the Eternal Deity and Creator Absolute of the universes.
While I have only had small tastes of them, when the divine energies are truly flowing it is a profoundly beautiful experience to say the least. And the calm, openness, and surrender that all the disciplines I’ve mentioned require is, at a minimum, a kind of proto- version of the childlike faith that Jesus taught. And that’s no small thing, even if it doesn’t always lead to full faith.
The ecstatic numinosity of those energies when they unfold can indeed be a problem for mystics, and I should have thought to mention this when discussing the related but much less common problems with extreme kundalini awakenings. (For those not familiar with what I mean by “divine energies”, kundalini, etc. the artist Alex Grey gives a good–if rather clinical–visual sense of certain aspects of them in part of his Sacred Mirrors painting here. I believe it will be obvious which of the paintings I’m referring to.)
Everything I’ve experienced and read leads me to believe that the ecstatic quality of the experience, esp. if combine with natural beauty (as it so often is in monasteries, etc.) can strongly tempt many to social withdrawal in order to abandon the more trying parts of loving service and just focus on the ecstacy of the numinous. Indeed, Scott Meredith frequently uses drug-culture terminology in talking about these energies in his book Juice: Radical Taiji Energetics.
But then, countless people throughout history have had precisely the same reaction to natural beauty. I’ve known quite a few of them personally. But just as I would never try to talk someone out of natural beauty as a means of inspiring worship because it can be so abused, I would not try to talk them out of the more intelligent forms of mediation.
One of the most effective ways to worship, for me, is through music. As a child attending church services, the hymns always spoke to me more than the sermons; and the music always touched my heart in ways that reading or speaking scripture could not. As an adult, I sing with a community choir and I use those rehearsal times and performances as opportunities for sincere expression of my love for God and my appreciation for His goodness. Even secular songs – especially songs about nature (such as choral works that have Robert Frost’s poetry as the lyrics), can inspire a worshipful attitude. Listening to high quality music can do it too; but singing is something special, for me anyway.
I feel the same way Keryn….my favorite part of every service are hymns (I turn the ‘blood’ hymns into ‘love’ hymns by word substitution – and I sing it loud!). I almost always do my UB reading and studies to inspirational music (defined by each of us differently) and think music is a form of substitute for nature…and its own musical inspirations of wind in the grass and trees and birds and insects, etc.
But I pray every day, many times a day and do strive to elevate the thanksgiving and best wishes/hopes for others (my form of prayer) to adoration and worship. Communion to me is more a feeling than anything else….a feeling of belonging and being loved….an enveloping presence.
"Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."
I particularly like listening to “My Sweet Lord” by Lennon.
My apologies to George Harrison.
. . . a kind of proto- version of the childlike faith that Jesus taught. And that’s no small thing, even if it doesn’t always lead to full faith.
What’s full faith?
. . . a kind of proto- version of the childlike faith that Jesus taught. And that’s no small thing, even if it doesn’t always lead to full faith.
What’s full faith?
Good question. I should have elaborated. To me full faith is the kind that sees you all the way to fusion and eternal life. I know people who are pretty advanced practitioners of various yogic disciplines (of the Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu, or Sikh varieties) who can do things that you simply must be calm, relaxed, and in some sense very open to life to do, but in both word in deed show no interest–and sometimes scorn–for the kind of childlike faith that brings survival.
It’s certainly not my place to judge as individuals whether or not any one of them will survive, but given their collective disinterest or even disdain for individual survival, it seems to me quite reasonable to take them as a whole at their word and think that few will make it. This in spite of the fact that they are demonstrably capable of things that require profound calm, relaxation, and openness, and often lovely and altruistic people in many ways. At least to my mind, those are all qualities of faith but, esp. given the above, those qualities may be necessary but are not sufficient for the faith that brings eternal life.
I mentioned Ken Wilber previously. Again it is, of course, **not** my place to judge his individual fate in the afterlife, but since he’s pretty public with all this, I don’t think it’s unfair to use him at least as an analogy. Whatever his ultimate convictions and deepest motives, I’ve been reading his books for years and have never gotten the slightest indication that he has childlike faith in a loving and personal God. Quite the opposite. In fact, I remember him stating in a conversation with Nathaniel Branden that he is an atheist. And yet… I’ve learned some deep and valuable things from him, he does a great deal of good for the world, and he does things that simply cannot be done without a great deal of clarity, unity, calm and focus. This would be one example, if a somewhat reductionist one.
As I’m sure you and everyone else on this thread knows, TUB mentions in multiple places the existence of adjusters that had formerly indwelt great women and men who did good and important things for their worlds (things that had to have taken some kind of faith) and yet those persons did not survive and fuse. To me, full faith is the kind that gets you to survival and fusion.
My apology if that was more elaboration than necessary, but hopefully it clarified my thoughts. Thanks for asking!
As I’m sure you and everyone else on this thread knows, TUB mentions in multiple places the existence of adjusters that had formerly indwelt great women and men who did good and important things for their worlds (things that had to have taken some kind of faith) and yet those persons did not survive and fuse. To me, full faith is the kind that gets you to survival and fusion.
Carl….I’m not familiar with this but I’ve been looking for something about it. Hoping you might help. I did find this which shows that some TA’s indwell minds which do survive and enjoy the eternal adventure….but do not fuse with the Father Fragment:
(410.4) 37:5.1 The High Commissioners are Spirit-fused ascendant mortals; they are not Adjuster fused. You quite well understand about the universe-ascension career of a mortal candidate for Adjuster fusion, that being the high destiny in prospect for all Urantia mortals since the bestowal of Christ Michael. But this is not the exclusive destiny of all mortals in the prebestowal ages of worlds like yours, and there is another type of world whose inhabitants are never permanently indwelt by Thought Adjusters. Such mortals are never permanently joined in union with a Mystery Monitor of Paradise bestowal; nevertheless, the Adjusters do transiently indwell them, serving as guides and patterns for the duration of the life in the flesh. During this temporary sojourn they foster the evolution of an immortal soul just as in those beings with whom they hope to fuse, but when the mortal race is run, they take eternal leave of the creatures of temporary association.
(410.5) 37:5.2 Surviving souls of this order attain immortality by eternal fusion with an individualized fragment of the spirit of the local universe Mother Spirit. They are not a numerous group, at least not in Nebadon. On the mansion worlds you will meet and fraternize with these Spirit-fused mortals as they ascend the Paradise path with you as far as Salvington, where they stop. Some of them may subsequently ascend to higher universe levels, but the majority will forever remain in the service of the local universe; as a class they are not destined to attain Paradise.
(411.1) 37:5.3 Not being Adjuster fused, they never become finaliters, but they do eventually become enrolled in the local universe Corps of Perfection. They have in spirit obeyed the Father’s command, “Be you perfect.”
At least to my mind, those are all qualities of faith but, esp. given the above, those qualities may be necessary but are not sufficient for the faith that brings eternal life.
What I wonder about is that faith which is sufficient for survival as compared to that faith required to be sufficient for eternal life? The two forms or qualities or experiences of faith are hardly the same I think. Eternal life is not assured prior to fusion itself and much is required for fusion. If the same faith were required of both, then any and all who do not fuse during mortal life would also not survive mortal life and then, naturally, there would be no need for the Mansion Worlds I do not think.
Perhaps this would be best discussed on the 200 Million topic but as your quote is here, so are my questions. Happy to copy and paste this over there as others may prefer….and delete from here to help keep on topic.
I wonder what forms of worship might be experienced by primitive minds and the minds of children? We’ve discussed faith acts and love response in such ones and we know that Andon and Fonta worshiped in their way….but without any context, knowledge, or beliefs to either help or detract from such a fundamental experience. Even the original primitives survived this life and went on to either Father or Spirit fusion….barbaric and ferocious primitives driven by fears and without altruism…but with loyalties. Does the child like wonder and awe we all experience in life triggered by nature or music deliver a reverence to the source of such delight?
63:0.1 (711.1) URANTIA was registered as an inhabited world when the first two human beings — the twins — were eleven years old, and before they had become the parents of the first-born of the second generation of actual human beings. And the archangel message from Salvington, on this occasion of formal planetary recognition, closed with these words:
63:0.2 (711.2) “Man-mind has appeared on 606 of Satania, and these parents of the new race shall be called Andon and Fonta. And all archangels pray that these creatures may speedily be endowed with the personal indwelling of the gift of the spirit of the Universal Father.”
63:6.2 (716.1) Andon’s philosophy had been most confused; he had barely escaped becoming a fire worshiper because of the great comfort derived from his accidental discovery of fire. Reason, however, directed him from his own discovery to the sun as a superior and more awe-inspiring source of heat and light, but it was too remote, and so he failed to become a sun worshiper.
63:6.3 (716.2) The Andonites early developed a fear of the elements — thunder, lightning, rain, snow, hail, and ice. But hunger was the constantly recurring urge of these early days, and since they largely subsisted on animals, they eventually evolved a form of animal worship. To Andon, the larger food animals were symbols of creative might and sustaining power. From time to time it became the custom to designate various of these larger animals as objects of worship. During the vogue of a particular animal, crude outlines of it would be drawn on the walls of the caves, and later on, as continued progress was made in the arts, such an animal god was engraved on various ornaments.
63:7.2 (717.3) On Jerusem both Andon and Fonta were fused with their Thought Adjusters, as also were several of their children, including Sontad, but the majority of even their immediate descendants only achieved Spirit fusion.
Apparently, worship, like faith, takes many forms – including animal, fire, and sun worship – which still has an effect on mind which grows soul and brings spiritization sufficient for not only survival…but eternal fusion and life. Interesting. I wonder if God does not provide sufficient time for sufficient experience for sufficient results??
"Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."
Bonita,
I share your interest in creative imagination and feel it is a powerful tool in the spiritual quest, a tool that is often underutilized. One of my favorite spiritual authors is A.K. Mozumdar.
“God has bestowed upon man the faculty of creative imagination by which man may become conscious of anything he chooses. No condition can exist to him without his conscious or unconscious recognition or acceptance of that condition. Whatever he recognizes and accepts becomes a reality to him.”
Mozumdar, The Triumphant Spirit, 1931.
I also share your interest in mental attitudes towards God and how they greatly affect the quality of both our prayers and our worship. If I may reiterate some of what you mentioned, Jesus emphasized the importance of maintaining this attitude of mind by stating both the reality that we are truly children of a Universal Father, as well as metaphorically – as a child has faith in his/her parents.
I think many would agree that two strong human inclinations are arrogance and pride, and I am no exception to these inclinations. But, as we are told, neither of these attitudes express spiritual reality nor the will of God. It is foolish of us to presume we are better than, or equal to, either God or any of his Sons and ministers. The reality of the situation is that, as compared to Deity, we will always remain in a subordinate position and, by being very humble, we not only demonstrate our acceptance of this reality, but also become more real in the process.
The same could be said for our trust in the goodness of God. Unwavering trust and belief puts our minds closer to the realities of the spiritual universe and cosmic citizenship. By trusting God, we become more real – spiritually mature. So when we come back to the notion of worship, I see the correct attitude of mind as an essential technique to a progressive realization of both our Father and the truth.
To tell another story – When my son was a tiny tot, I would put him on the mantelpiece (back when homes had fireplaces and mantelpieces). From there, he would laugh aloud and jump into my open arms with absolutely no hesitation at all, such was his childlike faith and trust in me.
Today, I recall these memories as a technique to correct my mental attitude prior to worship by imagining myself gleefully jumping from the edge of a mantelpiece before flying into the open arms of my loving Father.
Carl,
I really appreciate your efforts to introduce us to alternative methods and ways of thinking on the path to knowing God. And while I consider myself fairly well-read, I admit that I’m familiar with only one of your references – although I’m inclined to follow up on some others.
Nevertheless, if I understand to any degree the techniques you have mentioned, they are similar in intent to the methods of meditation, contemplation, and intelligent reflection mentioned in the UB, although the book is not always explicit about the specific mental processes involved. I think this vagueness is partly due to the fact that we must discover them for ourselves, just as we must also discover increasingly aware philosophies and scientific facts.
Many of us, once we have found the UB, read little else and tend to dismiss the discoveries of others (I did the same for a while). However, to some degree, our success and progression does rely on the discoveries of our fellows, not just in terms of science and sociology but even in the realm of mind and spirituality.
Through a survey of Amazon books, I notice an ongoing interest in meditation, mindfulness and yoga. While often these topics are discussed with no reference to a personal God, some of the techniques can be useful.
The UB uses the term “meditation” primarily in reference to the process of contemplation, which is a little different from the generally accepted notion, which is “to engage in mental exercise for the purpose of reaching a heightened level of spiritual awareness.” Merriam-Webster.
In the book, we see that Jesus uses meditation as a means to contemplate and resolve both mundane and spiritually-related problems. But we are also advised to meditate on the divine nature and attributes of God, the presence of the Spirit within, and the realities of truth, beauty, and goodness, as well as the realities of divine meanings and spiritual values which, I admit, are a little vague to me.
Spiritual, or worshipful meditation (as Rodan would say), also includes reflective worship and prayers of thanksgiving. But, while I understand the notion of reflection and self-reflection, I’m not entirely sure what “reflective worship” means.
I think of the art of mindfulness when it comes to self-reflection. In simple terms, mindfulness is the practice of truthfully and sincerely observing the thoughts and feelings that pass through our minds. It is used to become aware of the internal dialogue that serves to form much of our attitude towards life – our worldview as such. By checking, changing, deleting, or diverting certain thoughts, it can be a powerful tool for self-change, especially if used while imagining ourselves in the presence of God, a conscious reality which tends to keep us honest.
It’s certainly not my place to judge as individuals whether or not any one of them will survive, but given their collective disinterest or even disdain for individual survival, it seems to me quite reasonable to take them as a whole at their word and think that few will make it. This in spite of the fact that they are demonstrably capable of things that require profound calm, relaxation, and openness, and often lovely and altruistic people in many ways. At least to my mind, those are all qualities of faith but, esp. given the above, those qualities may be necessary but are not sufficient for the faith that brings eternal life.
I mentioned Ken Wilber previously. Again it is, of course, **not** my place to judge his individual fate in the afterlife, but since he’s pretty public with all this, I don’t think it’s unfair to use him at least as an analogy. Whatever his ultimate convictions and deepest motives, I’ve been reading his books for years and have never gotten the slightest indication that he has childlike faith in a loving and personal God. Quite the opposite. In fact, I remember him stating in a conversation with Nathaniel Branden that he is an atheist. And yet… I’ve learned some deep and valuable things from him, he does a great deal of good for the world, and he does things that simply cannot be done without a great deal of clarity, unity, calm and focus. This would be one example, if a somewhat reductionist one.
I think this quote explains what you’re describing above:
102:7.4 True, many apparently religious traits can grow out of nonreligious roots. Man can, intellectually, deny God and yet be morally good, loyal, filial, honest, and even idealistic. Man may graft many purely humanistic branches onto his basic spiritual nature and thus apparently prove his contentions in behalf of a godless religion, but such an experience is devoid of survival values, God-knowingness and God-ascension. In such a mortal experience only social fruits are forthcoming, not spiritual. The graft determines the nature of the fruit, notwithstanding that the living sustenance is drawn from the roots of original divine endowment of both mind and spirit.
Check out 101:3.4-18. It describes what true faith looks like. Nothing is mentioned about fusion there. All twelve spirit-like performances of a person with living faith have to do with everyday struggles of human existence. It’s all about the work of this world, not fusion. (I’d reproduce the quotes here but Bradley will be doing that in his thread soon.)
What I wonder about is that faith which is sufficient for survival as compared to that faith required to be sufficient for eternal life?
Yes, of course it’s the same faith, but it’s living faith and trust in God. A growing faithful person will progress in his/her trust in TRUTH, who is also a person.
p1141:5 103:9.7 Faith most willingly carries reason along as far as reason can go and then goes on with wisdom to the full philosophic limit; and then it dares to launch out upon the limitless and never-ending universe journey in the sole company of TRUTH.
Does the child like wonder and awe we all experience in life triggered by nature or music deliver a reverence to the source of such delight?
Do you think wonder and awe are the same thing as worship? Certainly many churches think so. The extraordinary buildings, ornate decorations and elaborate ceremonies are designed to move a person to awe and wonder. But, we’re told that is all evolutionary stuff. Fear evolves into awe and wonder and then finally into reverence. But worship is not about reverence; it’s about adoration and love. Jesus said he wanted us to move beyond reverence ” . . . .through recognition, realization, and appreciation, to love.”(149:6.3 )
Today, I recall these memories as a technique to correct my mental attitude prior to worship by imagining myself gleefully jumping from the edge of a mantelpiece before flying into the open arms of my loving Father.
That’s beautiful.
