If you had asked Alcott, “Was Jesus divine?”, he probably would have said, “Certainly, and so am I, and so are you, and so are all men and women on the face of the earth.” That would have been a good answer, hardly acceptable to most of his contemporaries.
But then, Alcott’s thought processes, his core assumptions, his perceptions, were often far in advance of his contemporaries. Even today what he writes may seem at first glance opaque, even meaningless. All I can say is, if these quotations seem at first indecipherable, sit with them a little, and see if they do not begin to open up new lines of thought.
&&&
June 11, 1839: “Jesus.
“This, of all lives, is the most refreshing. It quickens hope and faith. What a noble fact this man is! He is the grandest hero of all history. He is the epic genius, developed in all its magnanimity and grandeur. I read of Jesus with the deepest delight. He demonstrates my most exalted ideal of true heroism. He is the bravest of men.
“His grandeur is in his meek self-trust, his constancy to the Soul. How vital his faith in it! How noble his reliance upon it, under all the varied circumstances of his grand life! He carried his principles into practice. He tested them on every occasion. His life was an experiment of the omnipotence of the Soul; and his death was divine!
“Alas, how few apprehend the depth and grandeur of this man’s character! Christendom has made its lofty epic beauty of no effect by its vulgar traditions. I will yet divest it of these, and reveal its glory.”
&&&
March 28, 1850: “My dept to Plato is greater, perhaps than to any mind – greater than to Christ, I sometimes think, whose spirit is an element of humanity but whose genius I did not entertain and comprehend till Plato unsealed my eyes and led me to the study of his fair performance. It was in studies, however, for presenting the mind of Christ to the apprehension of my children in the Masonic Temple – a pleasure and a privilege greater than I can express – that I grew enamoured of the beauty and grandeur of his character, the delicacy and force of his genius, the simplicity and efficacy of his methods. Plato and Christ interpreted each other and the mind of mankind.”
Alcott certainly was opaque, with seemingly no interest (or ability?) in helping his readers follow his journey … being one of his “children in the Masonic Temple” must have been a trip 🤔!
Plato’s ‘unsealing of his eyes’ about Jesus is puzzling, as he died 300+ years before Jesus’ birth. In the June 11, 1839 passage he refers to him as ‘Jesus’ (the man?), but in the March 28, 1850 passage it’s ‘Christ’ (the spirit?). A change in Alcott’s understanding (11 years later)? … some connection of Jesus’ life to Plato’s philosophy?
Seems it’s far easier to find people ‘speaking’ for non-3D than to find the few that one understands and resonates with. But guess you could say that about any line of knowledge …
I am finding that the more I read Alcott, the less his literary mannerisms throw me off. his spirit shines forth: honest, sincere, intelligent, modest. A very attractive personality. In trying to comprehend him so many decades later, we do well to remember that Emerson and Thoreau valued him highly, and they were not easy markers. Plus, as i learn, the older Alcott got, the more he was esteemed by a wider audience.
As to Plato and Christ, what he meant is that reading Plato led him to see Christ in a different way. He did not mean that Plato wrote of Christ but that Plato’s way of seeing opened Alcott’s eyes, and he took that new vision to the subject of Jesus.
I am not sure what you mean in your final graf, and would appreciate a little explanation of it.
Reading Alcott reminded me of TGU’s exhortation to “Study the scriptures!”, which for me is saying information about non-3D has been and is available from many, many sources. One of my teachers said, “There are a million paths … the trick is to find the one with heart.” What’s important is to find a path that you resonate with, to the point you’re willing to put in the time and effort to learn. To paraphrase the old cliche about exercise and dieting: the best spiritual path is the one you’ll do.
My conclusion: reading what others ‘bring’ from non-3D is easy … the work for us seekers is sifting through the many ‘voices’ to find one we will work at, at least long enough to ‘feel’ it. And IMHO the important voices tell us how to hear non-3D ourselves, so we don’t need other voices.
Yes, I agree with all that. And I like the saying, which I had not heard previously, that the best path is the one you will do. Your point in the final graf might be paraphrased as, Other people’s records are great pointers, not so great substitutes for working.
Important to remember…the intended audience was not a random person from a different time and culture. Even so, I understand much of what he wrote. I do not know why he’s calling men attending a Masonic temple children. I can understand why he refers to Yesua as Jesus and Christ. Different names can be used emphasize different aspects of Being depending upon the mood/need of the speaker/writer.
Janey
Janey, he was referring to the school he ran for a few years, the attendees of whom were children. In fact, transcripts of his very advanced teaching methods (too advances for 19th century Boston were published as Conversations with Children on the Gospels, still in print.
P.S. Occurs to me he probably was talking about real children that were being assisted through some program sponsored by the Masons.
Not quite. See my reply to your earlier comment.