Circle of Christhood
The Study of Joel Goldsmith's Infinite Way
Introduction
From time to time, I would like to share things with you which relate to our Infinite Way studies in a contemporary way. Because I consider this to be a "teaching website" and I would like to follow Joel's instructions to teachers given in the "Letter to Norman."
I would like this page to be a place where you can come and find my suggestions or discoveries and if you like them, wonderful. If not, you are not obligated in any way to visit here. The goal is not to add anything to The IW, it is to share articles or events which are either reflective of the principles or in some way related to Joel's historic or prophetic comments. (In time, some of you may like to go further and learn specific work as it relates to World Work.)
Some of you may not be familiar with the historic references Joel discusses. You might find it interesting to do further research on some of his political opinions, comments and references to people and/or places. As I come across these, I would like to share them with you. However, they may not be of general interest, so visit here and then decide for yourself. In no way is this meant to change or "add" to Joel. He is our Master and The Infinite Way is complete as he brought it forth to us. For this reason, I need to make my work separate and very clearly something other than Joel's Infinite Way, even if related to it.
| CC: Dear David, This comes from www.freewebs.com/jashasalter ""Few there be that enter.The reason is this: There must be a sufficient devotion to God, to Spirit, to the Invisible, That which to sense is intangible. There must be enough devotion, enough longing, thirsting, or hungering for It that one is willing to sacrifice." Joel Please also look at the left side list of pages and find tithing. Also search in the Search page at the bottom. You will see that Joel said much about tithing. It is something he expected the students to do, to tithe to the IW workers and teachers in order that they might be able to be supported and do this work full-time. Since our healing work is done with no charge, most do not send anything. This leaves the practitioner in a bind, for they then have to work. This makes for less time to study, meditate and evolve - one of the reasons we have so few practitioners and teachers today. Thanks for the good question. Glad you like the site. | 5 days ago 76.173.163.x |
| David: Greetings - I have a question regarding Tithing ... is there anywhere, you are aware of, in Joel Goldsmith's writings, where he discusses this subject. I am interested to read his remarks about it. Thanks for a wonderful site - Best wishes - as always david |
| CC: Dear David, This comes from www.freewebs.com/jashasalter ""Few there be that enter.The reason is this: There must be a sufficient devotion to God, to Spirit, to the Invisible, That which to sense is intangible. There must be enough devotion, enough longing, thirsting, or hungering for It that one is willing to sacrifice." Joel Please also look at the left side list of pages and find tithing. Also search in the Search page at the bottom. You will see that Joel said much about tithing. It is something he expected the students to do, to tithe to the IW workers and teachers in order that they might be able to be supported and do this work full-time. Since our healing work is done with no charge, most do not send anything. This leaves the practitioner in a bind, for they then have to work. This makes for less time to study, meditate and evolve - one of the reasons we have so few practitioners and teachers today. Thanks for the good question. Glad you like the site. | 5 days ago 76.173.163.x |
| David: Greetings - I have a question regarding Tithing ... is there anywhere, you are aware of, in Joel Goldsmith's writings, where he discusses this subject. I am interested to read his remarks about it. Thanks for a wonderful site - Best wishes - as always david |
Robert Eisenman's Autobiography
Autobiographical Statement: Robert
Eisenman
After graduating college from
Cornell University in 1958, I first came to Israel in 1960 where I worked
on kibbutzim in the North (Kibbutz Sasa) and in the Emek (Kibbutz Hazorea).
But what was even more important to me, I met my whole family, the Eisenmans
of Jerusalem, whose existence for some reason had previously been concealed
from me in American inter-Jewish Community rivalries, probably as a
result of German Jewish attitudes towards Russian ones.
They were everywhere. Some
had been in the Haganah, some in the Jewish Brigade, some worked for
the Jewish Agency, some the Law courts, others worked at Hadassah Hospital,
and still another ran the Taxi Nesher which did the run from Jerusalem
to the Airport at Lod.
But most importantly to me,
I encountered for the first time my Great Grandfather, Avraham Herschel
Eisenman, who came to Jerusalem in the 1890’s in the time of the Turks
with his two younger sons, while his two older sons (my forbears) parted
company with him in Istanbul and came to New York – one of whom to
found the Metropolitan News Agency with later-celebrated David Sarnoff.
I and my brother Peter Eisenman, the architect of the Holocaust Memorial
in Berlin, are descendants of the poorer, more introspective one –
the one my father always described to us as “a yeshiva-bucher,
not long for this world.”
My Great Grandfather, Avraham
ben Itzhak (this probably the origin of the name “Eisenman”) me-Orli
near Bialostok, was the first Gizbar or Treasurer of the Bikkur
Cholim Hospital in Jerusalem (now in the news because of its recent
purchase by Russian billionaire immigrant Gadanek saving it from insolvency)
and his photograph was proudly displayed in its entrance hallway as
one entered, a photograph after it was taken down that was later given
to my wife and I by our family as a wedding present when we were married
in Jerusalem in 1971.
Avraham Eisenman later moved
into the hospital and actually lived on its upper floors till he died,
at which time he was buried on the Mt. of Olives; and, in 1967 after
the Six-Day War while I was doing graduate work in Middle East Languages
and Cultures at Columbia University, I returned on a summer grant and
found this grave which had been overturned by Arabs and many of its
stones removed, but the headpieces of he and his wife still remained
looking down on the Temple Mount where they had been deposited..
Later when we returned both
to make aliyah and finish my Doctorate (1968-73), both my wife
and myself restored and refurbished this grave, and I for one would
never do anything to dishonor his memory or that legacy but, on the
contrary, do everything to foster and enhance it – the reason for
my ongoing interests in the subjects I have approached in this column.
But, in fact, I had already taken such a vow “to serve the Jewish
People” ten years before, while I was staying as a guest of the Jewish
Community of New Delhi in June, 1962 and sleeping on a rope bed in the
courtyard of the synagogue there, a moment commemorated in my recently-published
book of “Road Poetry” and what I like to call my “Anti-Beat Manifesto”:
The New Jerusalem, 1959-62 (with an Afterword on the Six Day War,
April-June, 1967), published in July, 2007 by North Atlantic Books of
Berkeley, California, a subdivision of Random House. I made this vow
then and I meant to honor it. I think I have. I trust I have never done
anything to go back on it or dishonor it and never will.
I am also the author of: Islamic Law in Palestine and Israel (my Ph. D. dissertation -- E. J. Brill, Leiden, Holland, 1978); Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran: A New Hypohtesis of Qumran Origins (E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1982); James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher (E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1984); The Dead Sea Scrolls and the First Christians (Element/Harper Collins, 1996); James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Viking/Faber and Faber, 1997; Penguin, 1998); and The New Testament Code: The Cup of the Lord, the Damascus Covenant, and the Blood of Christ (Baird/Sterling/Barnes & Noble, 2006).
Robert Eisenman: Judas
Was there ever a “Judas Iscariot” or Simply a Product of Retrospective Theological Invective?
Two weeks ago I was at a Conference of the Society of Biblical Literature in San Diego, California, at which some Israeli academics also were in attendance, in which the main players in the new literature about the recently-surfaced “Gospel of Judas Iscariot” were together on a panel. These included James Robinson (The Secrets of Judas), Elaine Pagels (The Gnostic Gospels), Karen King (Reading Judas and the Shaping of Christianity), Gerd Ludemann (Das Judas-Evangelium), Marv Meyer (The Gospel of Judas), April DeConick (The Thirteenth Apostle), etc.
The most interesting points that emerged from the necessarily-curtailed discussion were how few “orthodox gosepls” (Matthew, Mark, Luke, etc.) had come to light from that period (the Second Century – one possible fragment from the Gospel of John was the only one cited) and how many heterodox ones had, on the other hand, appeared. Did this mean that more people at that time were reading “sectarian” Gospels rather than “orthodox” ones (i.e., those declared “orthodox” at Chuch Conferences in the Fourth Century)? The answer of the more conservative members of the Panel (the Chair, DeConick, Robinson, etc.) was, not really, but that, in any case, the newly-discovered “Gospel of Judas” was less historical than the orthodox.
At this point, since there were no other questions, I raised my hand and asked, “What makes you think any of them are historical and not just retrospective and polemical literary endeavors of a kind familiar in the Hellenistic World at that time? Why consider one superior to the other and not simply retrospective theological repartee expressed in a literary style? The Gospel of Judas was clearly a polemical philosophical text, but so too probably were all the others. Why not consider all a kind of quasi-Neoplatonic, Mystery Religion-oriented literature that was still developing in the Second Century and beyond as the Gospel of Judas clearly demonstrates?”
A sort of hushed silence fell on the three hundred or so persons present in the audience and the Panel Chair, one Michael Williams of the University of Washington, tried to interrupt with a response, but I pushed on to finish my thought, continuing: “Why think any historical or even representative of anything that really happened in Palestine in the First Century? Why not consider all Greco-Hellenistic romantic fiction or novelizing with an ax to grind – in the case of the “orthodox” anyhow (and to some extent the Gospel of Judas), incorporating the Pax Romana of the earlier Great Roman Emperor Augustus as other literature from this period had and, of course, the Anti-Semitism and anti-Jewish legal attachments which were the outcome of the suppression of the Jewish War from 66-73 CE (this, clearly, probably not the Gospel of Judas –was this the problem)? The Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans were masters of such man/god fiction and the creation of such characters as Osiris, Dionysus, Asclepius, Hercules, Orpheus, and the like as the works of Hesiod, Euripides, Virgil, Ovid, Petronius, Seneca, Apuleius, et. al. attest. Why not consider all of this literature simply part of this man-God/personification literature (in this instance, incorporating the new Jewish concept of “Salvation”/ “Yeshu’a”) and nothing more?”
At this point the Panel Chairman managed to succeed in getting in to give an answer on behalf of what he called “all the panel,” something to the effect that “Tradition” affirmed they were, but which was probably meant as a kind of “official” brush-off to me as one of the only non-Christians or persons of Jewish background in the room who might have enough knowledge to say something meaningful or precise enough to matter.
But in this Hanukkah season, it seems to me to be particularly relevant to raise the issue of this “Judas” again and, now that we have more tools, incumbent on us to do so. Regardless of predictable outcries from “the Left” or “the Right” of the theological spectrum or the impact on anyone’s “Faith” – as if this could matter in the face of all the unfortunate and cruel effects that have come from taking the picture of the “Judas” in Scripture seriously as ‘history’ – especially in the post-Holocaust Era, one must look at the issue of whether there ever was a “Judas Iscariot” per se, except in the imagination of these Gospel artificers – to say nothing of all the insidious materials circulating under his name.
Nor is this to say anything about the historicity of “Jesus” himself (another difficult question though the “Judas” issue leads the way on the “Jesus” one) or another, largely literary or fictional character very much now – in view of women's issues – in vogue, ‘Jesus’’ alleged consort “Mary Magdalene” and, according to some, the supposed mother of his only child “Sarah” (sic)! But while this latter kind of storytelling did little specifically-identifiable harm except to confuse one’s historical sense and sense of truth or confuse literature with history; the case of “Judas Iscariot” is quite another thing both in kind and effect. It has had a more horrific and, in fact, totally unjustifiable historical effect because his name has become a by-word for treachery and a slur on the whole Jewish people and, even if it happened the way the Gospels and the Book of Acts describe it – which is doubtful – effects of this kind were and are wholly unjustified and reprehensible, particularly in this season of our Hanukkah hero, “Judas Maccabee.”
.
In the first place, there are only a few references to “Judas Iscariot” in orthodox Scripture, all of which demonstably tendentious. For example, he is made in John 12:5 to complain about “Mary”’s (another of these ubiquitous “Mary”s – this time “Mary the sister of Lazarus” not “Mary Magdalene” or “Mary the mother of Jesus”) “anointing Jesus’ feet with precious spikenard ointment” in terms of why was not this “sold for 300 dinars and given to the Poor” – a variation on the “30 pieces of silver” he supposedly took for ‘betraying’ the Master later in Matthew 27:3-7 (and pars.). In Matthew and Mark is is the other “Disciples” or ‘some” who do the “complaining”, not specifially “Judas Iscariot.”
But anyone even remotely familiar with the vocabulary of this field would immediately recognize the allusion to “the Poor” as but a thinly-veiled attack on “the Ebionites” or that group of followers of “Jesus” (or his brother “James” in Palestine) who were probably “the aboriginal Christians and who, according to Eusebius in the Fourth Century, did not follow the doctrine of “the Supernatural Christ” and saw Jesus as simply a “man”/“a prophet,” engendered by natural generation and exceeding other men in the practice of Righteousness only.
In fact, the Lukan version of Judas Iscariot’s death which is found in Acts 1:16-19 and Matthew’s version do not agree with eachother at all, a normal state of affairs where Gospel reportage is concerned. In Matthew, Judas goes out and “hangs himself” (thus) after throwing the “thirty pieces of silver,” “the price of blood,” as Matthew likes to call it, into the Temple (whatever that means).This is supposed to fulfill a passage from “the Prophet Jeremiah,” when in fact the passage being quoted is a broadly-doctored version of “the Prophet Zechariah” (11:12-13), which does not really have the connotation Matthew is trying to give it. In Acts he “falls headlong” (reason unexplained, although this is the verb used in an Ebionite document called the Pseudoclementine Recognitions to describe the “headlong fall” James takes down the Temple steps when the “Enemy” Paul physically attacks him, leaving him for dead) into “a Field of Blood” (“the Alkeldama”) and “he burst open and his bowels gushed out” (sic)! Most conflate these materials but, as just signaled, this is really a parody of the death of James as reported in Early Church literature. So isthe stoning of Stephen (see my two books James the Brother of Jesus, Penguin, 1998 and The New Testament Code, Barnes and Noble, 2006) and the other two gospels do not mention either his death or how he died at all. This is all. Period.
The point, however, is that the entire character of “Judas Iscariot” is generated out of whole cloth and it is meant to be. Moreover it is done in a totally malevolent way. This, the recently-discovered “Gospel of Judas” was obviously trying to ameliorate, but after the first blush of excitement over its discovery, now the pendulum is beginning to swing the other way and, despite the good it and the National Geographic Program about it did and were doing, we are supposed to downgrade it and consider the “orthodox” gospels superior to it and, in some manner, more historical.
The creators of this character and the traditions related to him knew what it was they were seeking to do and in this they have succeeded in a manner far beyond they might have imagined and that would have astonished even their hate-besotted brains. Judas Iscariot is meant to be both hateful and hated – a diabolical character despised by all mankind and a byword for treachery and the opposite of all-perfection (forget the fact that it is a byword for Jews too, even to this day) – the perfect, Gnosticizing Mystery figure embodied in the person of the “Salvation” figure “Jesus,” the name of whom as we just saw even translates out as “Saviour.”
But in creating this character, the authors of these traditions and these “Gospels” (often, it is difficult to decide which came first, “the Gospels” themselves or the traditions either inspired by or giving inspiration to them) had a dual purpose in mind and in this, as already indicated, he has done his job admirably well. His very name “Judas” in that time and place was meant both to parody and heap abuse on two favorite characters of the Jews of the age, “Judas Maccabee,” the hero of Hanukkah festivities today, and “Judas the Galilean,” the legendary founder (described by the First-Century Jewish historian and turncoat, Josephus) of what one might either “the Zealot” or “the Galilean Movement” – even, as we shall see, “the Sicarii” – in fact, if the truth were out in the mutual back-and-forth polemics of these characterizations the whole of the Jewish People itself and, very possibly, a third character described in New Testament tradition as “Judas the Zealot,” the third ‘brother’ of ‘Jesus,’ known variously as “Judas of James”/“Jude the brother of James”/or “Judas Thomas” (“Judas the Twin”). In fact, if he is “Judas of James,” then he is also very probably “Thaddaeus” or another Messianic agitator described by Josephus, “Theudas,” who leads a reverse Messianic Exodus like his prototype Joshua and was beheaded in 44 CE – if all these characters can, in fact, be separated.
Moreover, the name “Jew” in all languages, as should be clear, actually comes from this biblical name “Judas” or “Judah” (“Yehudah”), a fact not missed by the people at that time and not too misunderstood even today – so therefore the pejorative on “Judas” or “Judah” and the symbolic value of all that it signified in the First Century CE was not missed either by those who created this particular ‘blood libel’ or by all other future peoples even to this day and, as just signaled, how very successful over the last two thousand years.
But there is another dimension to this particular ‘blood libel’ which has also not failed to leave its mark, historically speaking, on the peoples of the world and that is “Judas”’ cognomen “Iscariot.” No one has ever found the linguistic prototype or origin of this curious denominative, but it is also not unremarkable that in the Gospel of John he is also called “Judas the son” or “brother of Simon Iscariot” and, at one point, even “the Iscariot” (John 6:71, 14:22, etc.).
Of course, the closest cognate to any of these rephrasings is the well-known term Josephus uses to designate (also pejoratively) the extreme “Zealots” or Revolutionaries of the time, “the Sicarii” – the ‘iota’ and the ‘sigma’ of the Greek simply having been reversed, a common mistake in the transliteration of Semitic orthography into unrelated languages like English and well-known in Arabic, the ‘iota’ likewise too generating out of the ‘ios’ of the singular in Greek,“Sicarios.” There is no other tenable approximation that this term could realistically allude to. Plus the attachment to it of the definite article “the,” whether mistakenly or by design, just strengthens the conclusion.
Furthermore, Judas’ association in these episodes with the concept both of “the Poor” (the name of the group led by ‘Jesus’’ brother James in First-Century Jerusalem as also just remarked), as well as that of a suicide of some kind in Matthew and rather tendentiously in Acts – suicide being one of the tenets of the group Josephus identifies as carrying out just such a mass procedure at the climax of the famous last stand on Masada – to say nothing of the echo of the cognomen of the founder of this Party or Orientation, the equally famous “Judas the Galilean” (also a “Judas the Zealot” as “Judas Maccabee” would have been), just strengthens this conclusion. As just remarked, I have covered many of these matters in my book: James the Brother of Jesus: The Key to Unlocking the Secrets of Early Christianity and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Penguin, 1998) and in its sequel: The New Testament Code: The Cup of the Lord, the Damascus Covenant, and the Blood of Christ, Element/Baird/Sterling/ and Barnes and Noble just out last year in December, 2006.
Equally germane is the fact that another “Apostle” of ‘Jesus’ is supposed to have been called – at least according to Lukan Apostle lists – “Simon the Zealot”/“Simon Zelotes” which, of course, also translates out in the jargon of the Gospel of John as “Simon Iscariot” or “Simon the Iscariot.” Moreover, he was more than likely a ‘brother’ of the curious Disciple in the same lists, already mentioned above and called “Judas of James,” that is, “Judas the brother of James” (the way the designation is alluded to in the New Testament Letter of Jude/Judas). In a variant manuscript of an early Syriac document, The Apostolic Constitutions, hinted at above too, this individual is also designated ‘Judas the Zealot,’ thereby completing the circle of all these inter-related terminologies which seem to have been coursing through so many of these early documents in this period.
Of course, all these matters are fraught with difficulty, but once they are weighed together, there is hardly any escaping the fact that “Judas Iscariot ”/“the Iscariot”/“the brother” or “son of Simon the Iscariot” in the Gospels and the Book of Acts is a polemical pejorative for many of these other characters meant to defame and polemically demonize a number of individuals seen as opposing the new ‘Pauline’ or more Greco-Roman esotericizing doctrine of the “Supernatural Christ.” The presentation of this “Judas,” polemicizing as it was, was probably never meant to take on the historical and theological dimensions it has, coursing through the last two thousand years and leading up to the present, but with a stubborn toughness it has endured.
Nevertheless, its success as a demonizing pejorative has been monumental, a whole people having suffered the consequences of not only of seeing its own beloved heroes (one of the most notable of whom being the Judas Maccabee of our Hanukkah Celebrations today) turned into demonaics, but of being hunted down mercilessly – to some extent the frightening result of its efficacy. If anything were a proof of the aphorism “Poetry is truer than history,” then this is. To repeat, I believe its original artificers would have been astonished by its incredible success. Even beyond this, not only is there no historical substance to the presentation or its after-effects, but if ‘Jesus’ were alive today – whoever he was, human or supernatural, literary or historical, real or unreal – he would be shocked at such vindictiveness and diabolically-inspired hatred and he, perhaps even more than all others, would have expected his partisans to divest themselves of this historical shibboleth, particularly in view of the harm it has done over the millennia especially to his own people.
This is what the initial appearance of the Gospel of Judas gave promise of helping to achieve, but now the rehabilitation of the character known to the world as “Judas” – so greatly in order in the light of the incredible atrocities committed over the last century, some as a consequence of this particular libel – predictably seems to be reversing itself, particularly among theologically-minded persons (see, for instance April DeConick’s article: “Gospel Truth” in The New York Times editorial page, December 1st, 2007) as scholars start to rethink these things; and the process engendered by this historical polemic and reversal now seems to be receding, the downplaying of its historicity relative to alleged “orthodox Gospels” being evidence of this. It is yet another deleterious case of literature, cartoon, or lampoon being taken as history.
Still, in the light shed on these matters by the almost miraculous discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls too, it is time people really started to come to terms with the almost completely literary and ahistorical character of a large number of figures of the kind of this “Judas” in whatever the “Gospel” and in whatever manner he is portrayed – positive or negative – and, in the process, admit the historical malevolence of the original caricature and move forward onto the higher plain of the amelioration of rehabilitation. This is what Christians of good will have always said they are interested in doing. In this Hanukkah season, no healthier, happier, or higher hope could be wished for or expressed.
Robert Eisenman
Spiritual Loyalty
"And so their allegiance, their loyalty, their obedience was based not on a rule, not on a regulation, but on a recognized state of consciousness." Joel on Tape 127 side 2
Loyalty is a word that we seldom use any more. When we consider our studies, it might be interesting to ask if we consider ourselves to be a loyal person. What does the word mean to us and how are the ways we live this aspect of evolved character?
When Joel speaks about our focusing on one teaching, devoting ourselves completely and supporting our work and our message, he is speaking about loyalty. He is expecting us to be loyal to him, to the Letter, to IT, to The Infinite Way - if this is the path we have chosen.
Life encourages us to not be loyal. We are not rewarded for being life-long customers of a company. Often new business is much more sought after than the maintaining old business. (Think about your newspaper or phone/cable/tv services. Your rate continues to go up, but new customers get "introductory deals.") We grow up "playing the field." Boys used to do it and be proud of it. Now girls do it too. So we have a culture of "one-night-stands," and no one seems to notice anymore. Choosing one person can be seen as being unadventurous, lazy, stupid, blind. Staying loyal to a brand seems rigid and unimaginative. Staying loyal to a job, boring and rote.
Loyalty to a group makes us a "fundamentalist". Think about the negative ways our culture has affected our perceptions about "loyalty."
Our work on this path is not easy. It exacts every emotion and resource we have. The Infinite Way asks us to decide on what we really are after, and nothing begins to open and unfold until we determine we are committed to finding God. It asks us for our loyalty, our dedication to IT, an unconditional surrender, an unconditional love.
How blessed that IT was so loyal to us that IT did not leave us alone, but found us and called. The question now is: Are we able and willing to be loyal in return?
Student Letter Regarding Supporting Our Workers
November 10, 2007
http://www.wiseweavers.net
"The Key to an Abundant Life," A weekend retreat based on the teachings of Joel S. Goldsmith.
Offered by Arnie J Vargas, ACSW
When: From Friday eve, March 16, until Sunday afternoon, March 18,2007
Where: Alhambra Hotel, Playa del Carmen, Mayan Riviera, Mexico
Program Description: Join us for a brake from the Winter weather in the Mayan Riviera of Mexico, to explore the mystical teachings of Joel S Goldsmith on healing and well being. Ideal weekend for anyone practicing, or interested in alternative healing. Understanding the key to the principles that constitute an abundant life, and practicing those principles, is the key to effective healing and to a harmonious life.
During this weekend in this beautiful setting ( www.alhambra-hotel.net) participants will be exposed to the mystical teachings that have brought abundant life to thousands. Among the features of the retreat will be:
* Morning Yoga with Master Teacher: Jose Francisco Martinez,
* Delicious food,
* Time to enjoy the beach and surroundings,
* Time to make new friends with others on the spiritual path,
* The acquisiton of spiritual tools to face life's many challenges,
* and much more...
Retreat Fee: $150
Accommodation prices range from $61 per night, per person (4 in a room) to $151 per night for private rooms. Double and Triple accommodations also available. Price per room includes breakfast and buffet lunch.
For further information: Please call Arnie J Vargas at 212-721-9572 or at 609-898-4334, or via email: ajvargas44@yahoo.com .
Arnie J Vargas, ACSW
Coordinator.
About the Presenter: Arnie J Vargas, ACSW, is a Psychoanalytically Trained Psychotherapist, Reiki Master, Shaman, Adjunct Instructor at New York University's Graduate School of Social Work (The Shirley M Ehrenkranz School of Social Work), International Teacher and Healer. Besides conducting retreats on the teachings of Joel S Goldsmith, Arnie teaches on the connection between Sexuality and Spirituality, and various other thems from diverse Spiritual Traditions. He maintains a private practice in New York City and in Cape May, NJ, where he resides.
Nov. 1, 2007
Last week, we had a very powerful Closed Class in Los Angeles. As often happens after a Closed Class, new information or inspiration comes forth for our work. (It was given to those there and will grow in sacredness to bring forth fruitage.)
I must emphasize to you all that this CC site is not affiliated with ANY other arm of the IW. We support the office in theory and practice, Lorene McClintock's student outline which Joel approved, but do not support any other IW activity at this time.
This week began with a mass emailing by Mary Noack and Deb Tru to join a new directory inviting everyone and anyone interested in the IW to list. I did not have any problem at first, but almost immediately was led away from that as you all know. This began some research on our part.
Immediately we were led to stop being on ANY IW list at all, even the innocent information mailing list on our Guestbook. I think the Guestbook automatically asks one to join if you leave an email. So, please do not enter your email on the site. Just send me an email to cciwcc@gmail.com if you want me to communicate with you.
So many people feel lonely and alone on this path. It is uncomfortable humanly to think we have a message which has no building, no meetings, no ritual, no leader, no safety net. Our universal mesmerism has taught us to expect this of a religion. Yet, Joel did not want us organized. Lists are organization - even a minor form. Chat rooms are organization.
I am so sorry that we must learn to be on our own, not discuss and debate with one another, not depend on another human. Joel did not want us to be lonely, to be stranded on our own. Joel loved get-togethers with his students. He was a social person. His council to us comes from his deep concern for what he knew the Error of the world capable of. He knew what organizations did to every religion in history. They, sometimes quickly, sometimes over centuries, VEIL the message - alter, adjust and finally destroy the message.We must be wise and listen if we care about our journey here and the message. Joel knew it would not be easy, most would not be able to stand the loneliness. Are you?
What has come so clearly to me last night is that we are being called to have courage and strength to take this stand-to not care if we are the only ones in our town, state, or country - our world to follow as Joel led us. Ten righteous men can save the world. It does not need many.
Please listen.
Take this within and get your own personal confirmation.
What Joel expected to happen in the world, did not happen as soon as he had hoped. It is important for those in the IW to diligently study the tapes, the writings and to meditate, alone or with a few. It does not matter. If we begin to socialize and look for human support, we will loose our way. Consider a student going off to college. Which do you think is the wiser, more serious student? The one who immediately joins a fraternity of "like minded students" or one who studies seriously, visits the library alone, focuses on the work rather than on the diversions?
It is hard to be disciplined and alone. Not everyone is cut out to do it. If you are, please stay in touch by email or by phone and we will find a way together to support one another in our "aloneness." You are not really alone. We are one, one together. In this world, it only feels like we are alone. Get the tapes, use them daily. Try to collect the 1963, 1964 complete series after the 55 Kailua and 59 Hawaiian Healing tapes. Meditate 20,30 times a day. Do Protective Work and live the principles.
Do go within often. You will find us all there with you.
Love,
CC
310 476 4469 Pacific Time
August 1, 2007
http://www.podcastdirectory.com/podshow s/959795
It is hard to believe that an unidentified voice would read a passage of Joel on Podcast and follow it up with Salsa music in a jazz d.j. format.
July 20, 2007
I would like to highly recommend the July 23, 2007 edition of The New Yorker. You will find a wonderful article, "A Bolt From the Blue" by Oliver Sacks. In it, we read about a doctor struck by lightening who has an illumination experience; and how his life changed thereafter. It involves current concepts in neuroscience, reincarnation, and divine inspiration. It is very interesting, with much food for thought (Tesla, Near Death Experience, etc.). I found it very compelling and accurate and caused me to reflect on my own experiences. It may do the same for you.
