Tuesday, July 2, 2019
3:45 a.m. All right, Saying 62 a and b. At first glance they don’t seem connected to each other. I have no doubt that they are, that the disciple who strung them together knew how and why. I do wonder who numbered the Sayings.
62 a. Jesus said: I tell my mysteries to people worthy of my mysteries.
62 b. Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.
Surely you don’t think we are the first team to elucidate the scriptures for others. That is a never-ending process, by definition. Scriptures speak only to the living present-tense intelligence, and need to be restated to each new generation, or anyway to members of each new civilization.
Sure. The words go dead on us, and have to be replaced by words we can understand.
It is less a matter of being able to understand than of not going blank upon hearing words recited too often, recited without understanding.
Words like “supernal,” and “on high” and plenty others.
Everyone will have his own list, but yes.
So, Saying 62 a. Seems simple, and so does 62 b. How do they fit together? And yes, I am remembering to connect them to 61, which speaks of our needing unified awareness.
In 62 a Jesus may be said to be saying, “I can only talk to those who can hear.” In the other gospels he says as much; that’s why he was speaking in parables. But in this gospel, you see a more internal version of that truth. That is, he says, in a sense, that he cannot waste his time, so he cannot speak truth to those incapable of hearing it, and in 62 b he adds a bit of advice. Why? What’s the connection?
Suppose he is telling them, “You have to be alert. You have to adapt your message to your circumstances. You have to be and do what is required.”
I don’t see how you get that.
“Do not let” – in other words, arrange things by division – “one hand know what the other is doing.”
I still don’t get it. it seems to cut against the idea of every individual who can, becoming aware of his own actions and the reasons for them. How does it profit anybody to enforce ignorance?
Well, let’s move on to 63 which again seems unconnected to the others, and see if that sheds light.
63 Jesus said: Once there was a rich man who had lots of money, and he said, “I will invest my money so that I can sow, reap, plant, and fill my silos with crops so that I won’t lack anything.” So he thought, but that night he died. He who has ears, let him hear.
As you see, it says, life is uncertain, and making plans as if it were going to go on forever, or as if you had a guarantee of even another day, is foolish, or, at any rate, undependable.
So what do you have? “I speak only to those who can hear. Don’t be transparent to the world. Don’t expect that 3D life is going to go on indefinitely.” And taken together, what do they say to you?
It’s part of a training manual.
Well, in one sense, yes. He was giving them good advice for dealing with the world after he was gone. But remember the goal of the Sayings – or rather, the goal of his teachings and mission as a whole – which was, that people could come to a more abundant life. These sayings were not meant only for those who would go forth to convert others (or, closer, to explain things so as to open the eyes of those able to understand). They were meant for any, of whatever life-purpose, so that they could profit from them in their own lives without regard for any external orientation such as preaching.
It occurs to me, 62 b is similar to advice that they be wise as serpents, as gentle as doves.
Yes, good. It does not suffice nor it is always appropriate to be transparent in a wicked world. But concealment and misdirection, like everything else in 3D life, have different natures depending upon one’s intent. Intent determines the nature of an action, even an interior action unobserved by others. It is not true that the same act or even thought is the same regardless of context.
I suppose we could say 62 in general is a lesson in awareness.
In the need for awareness, and in how to express awareness, and in the reason for awareness, yes. Let us proceed.
All right, Saying 63 a and b. A long one to copy.
64 a Jesus said: A man entertained guests. When dinner was ready he sent a servant to invite his guests. The servant went to the first one and said, “My master invites you,” but he replied, “I have to collect money from some merchants, and they are due to arrive this evening. Therefore I have to do business with them, and I must be excused from the dinner.” The servant went to another and said, “My master invites you,” but he said, “I have just bought a house, and I have to spend a day there, so I cannot come. I must be excused.” He went to the next and said, “My master invites you.” This one replied, “My friend is about to be married, and I must organize the dinner. I can’t come. I must be excused.” And he went and said to another, “My master invites you.” He replied, “I have just bought a village, and I have to go collect the rent. I can’t come and must be excused. The servant reported back to his master, “Those whom you invited to the dinner are unable to come” The master said, “Go to the roads outside and invite anybody you can find to the dinner.”
64 b Merchants and salesmen will not enter the places of my Father.
This is a familiar parable, and should be clear to you.
It is. The 3D world has a million cares and concerns, and if you let them come first, you can lose your chance.
Perhaps better to say, as long as you let them come first, for there is nothing irrevocable in the invitation, but yes. And it isn’t as if Jesus has anything against commerce; he is warning against taking the 3D world and its concerns as if it were the most important thing in life.
And I can see how this has to be come to. [That is, why this one couldn’t come first among the Sayings.] He could hardly start there, because as long as people think the 3D world is ultimate reality, they will be unable to make sense of the idea that it is a means and not an end.
That’s correct. Saying 65?
- He said: A good man had a vineyard that he arranged for tenant farmers to take care of for him in return for a portion of the produce. He sent a servant to collect the grapes. Tenants seized the servant and beat him nearly to death. That servant reported back to his master, but his mater responded, “Perhaps they did not recognize him.” So he sent another servant; the tenants beat him too. Then the owner sent his own son, saying, “Perhaps they will show some respect for my son.” Since the tenants were aware that he would inherit the vineyard, the seized him and then killed him. He who has ears, let him hear.
Can you see that this is at once a continuation of advice for those who would try to awaken their fellows and advice merely on how to live one’s life after awakening? The tenants are concerned only with the tangible products of the land, and did not choose to recognize the rights of the owner. Their greed let them even to murder.
You might think – reading the parable as if it were a story – that the good man was foolish to give the tenants repeated chances to do right, and was superlatively unaware of the danger he was putting his son into. But a parable is not entertainment, but a teaching device. The point is that it is not enough to remind people that the 3D life is not sufficient unto itself: They will resent it, they will suspect that this is an attempt to divert their attention so as to take from them the result of their labors. (This, regardless of the morality or equity of the situation. This is not a legal casebook, any more than it is a police procedural manual or a bit of social commentary. The listeners to the Saying would have gotten the point, either on hearing or reading it, or in subsequent discussion, until such time as community learning failed for lack of anyone who truly understood the key.)
So, the point of the saying, in context, is that you can have something of great value; that doesn’t guarantee that others will see that value. Worse, that doesn’t mean they will respond appropriately. They may be motivated to resent the message and the messenger, for the message implies obligations that they may not wish to acknowledge, let alone fulfill.
I see that. Very interesting. Saying 66? Short and familiar from the synoptic gospels also.
Why should the stone that the builders reject be the cornerstone? That is, why should Jesus be implying a necessary rather than an accidental connection between rejection and the fundamental nature of the stone?
You don’t mean “fundamental nature,” exactly. More like, “the ability to be the stone upon which the structure may be built.”
Okay. But – why?
Tell us. Conventional theology would probably say that Jesus was talking about himself and his role in founding Christianity, but I doubt it.
No, not in this context. This was about what people need to do to have life more abundantly. Another way to say that would be, how they needed to reshape themselves – what decisions they would need to come to, and bring into reality, and then react to in order to produce lasting third-tier results.
We have to find within ourselves what we have rejected or at least neglected, and build upon that?
Let us pause here. Keep this question open and consider it in the context not only of the preceding Saying but of the Saying that follows.
All right. Very dense session this morning. Very interesting. Our thanks as always.