May 9, 2016 10:18 AM
The main series of insights from the other night revolved around a previously hidden pattern in the 9 Aspects and a re-defining of two of them—the Shadow and the Ascetic Aspects.
As the mental reassembly of the Aspects came together, I started to contemplate what I meant by Mystic. In doing so, I got the great idea that the Divine isn’t required for one to be called a Mystic.
My logic went like this (keep in mind, it was around 3 in the morning):
- Mystic (original definition): One who is in love with the Divine Source and all its manifest things.
- Mystic (new, 3am definition): One who is in love with the Source and all its manifest things.
By simply removing the word, “Divine” from the definition, it makes Mystical Oneness approachable to all!
I have always considered Taoists to be mystics because of their love of the Tao—the source of the “ten thousand things.” Most people don’t consider the Tao divine because most people don’t consider the Tao intelligent. It can be, but the beauty of Taoism is it doesn’t have to be.
If the Source is intelligent, it is Divine. If it isn’t, it’s just a law of nature—sort of like gravity. With this logic, the Source of all things doesn’t have to be a Divine Source.
So I thought I was onto something… just remove the Intelligent-Source criteria from Mystical Oneness and it works for everyone! Atheists can read TaoGod as Tao; the religious can read it as God; and everyone in between can read it as is. Brilliant!
I tried. I really did. I spent most of yesterday trying to deny God as I re-read the Mystic Chapter of the manuscript.
And I couldn’t do it. The problem I would keep running into was the awakening of the siddhis—the paranormal events and abilities that come into full bloom on spiritual enlightenment (though they begin to “wake up” with the Soul Aspect).
How can simply changing the way you think about yourself account for the rapid increase in synchronistic events? In telepathy? In being guided to places unknown, yet invariably for someone’s benefit? How does changing the way you experience yourself promote some mysterious healing powers? Or explain the duplex personality (a vastly more intelligent personality within you)?
I simply couldn’t come up with a viable explanation for the siddhis—at least one that didn’t feel like it was held together with bubble gum and popsicle sticks. I simply could not come up with a rational explanation for the siddhis that did not involve some overarching Intelligence.
For example, take the siddhi of “life lining up” that practically every truly awakened individual experiences. It requires an Intelligence that can manipulate far distant events that the individual is ignorant of. How could a person do that—manipulate distant events that they aren’t even aware of?
An interesting synchronicity: As I was struggling with this issue, this post appeared in my newsfeed. (The Atheist: “No Wayne, that’s just another odds-defying coincidence, nothing paranormal.”) Lori Ann woke up about a year after me and has come to many of the same conclusions I have.
Simply put, because of the siddhis—and the siddhis awaken and multiply for practically everyone who steps through the Gateless Gate—the Divine is an intrinsic “component” of the enlightened experience.
So though I tried, I failed in denying TaoGod.
You may be an atheist or agnostic now, but if you continue on the path toward enlightenment—you won’t be for long.
It's Time To Wake Up
Mystical Oneness and the Nine Aspects of Being is a step-by-step guide to enlightenment and beyond.
It's Time To Be Happy