The Motherhood Of God

The  Motherhood  Of  God

YouTube  Video

Uranda  April 29, 1954 p.m.

 

In our period of meditation on Sunday evening we began a consideration of Mother God [greatcosmicstory.blogspot.com/father-and-mother-aspects-of-god.html], and tonight let us continue in the pattern of that meditation, to the end that we may come to know the reality not only of Father God but also of Mother God. Our hearts are filled with a deep sense of the beauty, the wonder, of this sublime subject of meditation.

When we think of the full expression of womanhood as it finds manifestation through the reality of the female form and the female experience of motherhood, we think of something exquisitely beautiful, unutterably wonderful. We have all watched the pattern of fulfilment, how even a woman who is considered to be plain or even homely is transformed by the wonder of love, and there is a beauty of being which shows forth from her whole expression of life; and then, as she approaches the expression of motherhood, the experience of sharing with God the work of bringing a new life into the world, that face, no matter how it may have been classified according to the world concepts of prettiness, begins to take on that Madonna beauty which is a revelation of God's glory on earth. We have noted that glory is related to the increasing vibrant expression of life. We have read the words, “The glory of the Lord filled the temple and shone round about,” and as we have beheld the development in the pattern of the mother-to-be we have seen how the temple of her body is filled with the glory of the Lord which shines round about. If there be any perception in the one who observes, there is surely a sense of hallowed ground, something unspeakably sacred, holy and sublime.

If we as human beings, in our pattern of relationships on earth, see and behold such things and recognize them and know them in relationship to the mother-to-be on earth, how much more beautiful, how much more sacred and holy, how unspeakably divine, how gloriously sublime, must be the picture that begins—even though it be but faintly at first—to take form in our consciousness as we begin to consider the reality of Mother God. And as we yield to contemplation, we feel a certain thrill in meditation upon this holy subject, where the consciousness so centered is definitely aware of the basic truth that even though we may not have understood what it was that was missing from the realm of being in the range of our perception, and no matter how fully we may have given heed to the thought of loving Father God—and without in any sense detracting from Father God, we know that that deep restlessness, that unspeakable inner longing, was in part at least the desire to know Mother God. For even though we here on earth, as the children of God, might come to know Father God, we could not here develop a true and full consciousness of the sense of being at home—at home on earth or anywhere—without the presence of Mother God. And so, having once seen the vision, we know that we cannot rest, we cannot feel ourselves to be at home until, to our aspiring hearts and minds, the mystery of Mother God is unveiled.

It would perhaps, for the moment at least, be pleasing to pause to speculate somewhat upon the unspeakable beauty that must be revealed through the form and being of Mother God. We might meditate upon the infinite wonder of Her love. We might consider the pattern of Her oneness with Father God. But for the moment such desires must, in part at least, be set aside, for speculation would be an idle waste of precious time, which must needs be spent in finding and learning to know the secret of Mother God. Having found Her, we will then have time to spend considering Her beauty, the wonder of Her love, and enjoying the unspeakable security and sense of “at-homeness” which springs from a vivid consciousness of Her oneness with Father God.

To be certain that we move in the right direction in our search—and we are reminded of the words of the Father spoken by our Lord on earth, “For he that seeketh findeth,” and there is assurance in those words, “He that seeketh findeth”—but to be certain, we check ourselves, our position and our direction of movement in the pattern of the One Law. And as we pause we realize that under the Law it would be impossible for Father God to be, to create, or in any manner to achieve, except in relationship to Mother God.

This assurance springs from our knowledge of the Law: it could not be otherwise. We may not yet know very much about Mother God, but we are assured that our search shall not be in vain, because, under the laws of God, the principles of being, we know that Mother God must be somehow a reality. Convinced of this one thing, that Mother God IS, and that if we are the children of God then we surely have a close relationship to Her, and She has much meaning to us, we find the question arising, “Why is it that we have not seen more of Her? How is it that She has been either unknown or so obscure that no clear picture of Her has been found in the consciousness of humanity as a whole?”

This question could send us on paths of meaningless speculation, and yet we know inherently that somewhere the answer to the question is inherent in the question itself. We have the assurance, whether we have developed a clear realization of the truth of it or not, we have the assurance that we are the Children of God. Whether we have so lived that that fact is revealed in our lives or not, we have been called the Children of God, and we have recognized the reality of Father God.

We remember the Master said, “Except ye become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” And how, in the normal, natural state, shall a little child appear except in company of mother? Are we, as Little Children, condemned to search through the dark alone without Mother—Mother God? If we are to come as a little child, normally the little child has the mother, and mother is not far away. And then, if this be true, if this truth finds an answering chord in our hearts that surely it must be so, another question arises in our minds for which our hearts seek an answer, “What do we find in the little child?” We know of this Little Child. This is the starting point.

We have assurance that Father God is somewhere in His mansion, but here is the Little Child. What is it that we find in the Little Child? Oh there may be answers such as trust and love, etc. But what is revealed in the little child? “Oh,” we may answer, “the need of a mother's care. And there is the need for the father's provision.” The Father's provision—we have thought of that before. We know the need for the Father's provision, and the Little Child has the need of a Mother's care. Yes. But what else do we find revealed in the Little Child? What else?

As we look at a child, an earthly child, the tendency is to say, “Why, he is like his daddy,” or “She is like her mother.” The revelation through the child is, or should be, something of a revelation of the parents, something peculiar to itself—this child—but not just a revelation of the father, a revelation of the parents, of mother, for the mother has an influence upon the child. And if we look at the child, this little child, and if we be the Children of God, we can surely find an indication of more than relatedness to Father God; there must likewise be a revelation of Mother God. For how could we be the Children of the Father except by reason of the Presence, the reality, and the nature of Mother God? Mother God has not been, in times past, adequately revealed to the awareness of mankind. The Children of God have recognized the need for the Father and His provision, and they have stopped for a sense of security in relationship to Father God. But how could such a thing be without Mother God?

“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”—two parts of one thing, male and female—and if Mother God IS, and there must be the conviction that She IS, what would Father God desire for Mother God, unless it should be a beautiful Home, a place where She could live and find the fulfilment of Her Being? A beautiful Home. “And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden.” And for whom would He plant the Garden? You may say, “For His Children.” Oh, yes, He no doubt had His Children in mind, the Children-to-Be. But if a man plants a garden, is it not for his wife? If Father God planted a Garden eastward in Eden, didn't He do it for Mother God and that they, in Oneness of Being, might share it with their Children? Is God less thoughtful than the human male who desires for his wife a lovely home? “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” For whom? Not just for the Children He expected to have someday when the Home was finished, as we say, when the work of creation was completed. Would His first thought not be of a Home for Mother God?

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the earth.” This would appear that the “we” or the “us,” the plural, intended to retain direct control over heaven, whatever that might be. “Let US make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the earth.” Their place was to be on earth; their home was to be on earth; and the dominion of God should manifest on earth through them, those who were created in the image and likeness of God. And God did so: “Male and female created he them,” and let them have dominion over the earth.

Male and Female created He Them

And Mother God: can we bring forth that which is not like unto ourselves? No. Nor can God. If God had not recognized the reality of the female in relationship to Himself He could not have brought forth the female. You cannot give what you do not have. You cannot make that which you are not. That which you bring forth must come out of the nature of your own being. And so it is with God.

“Male and female created he them.” Then it was done in the image and likeness of God—the likeness of the male and the likeness of the female, the likeness of Father God and the likeness of Mother God. “Let US create mankind in our image, after our likeness.” And God did so: “Male and female created he them.” If these words then be true, male and female patterns of Being are in God, and here is presented to our minds and our hearts another assurance, not only of the reality of Father God but also the reality of Mother God.

Mother God. We have heard about Father God, and we have considered a home in heaven, instinctively if not consciously feeling an assurance that surely there Mother God would be, for we cannot be at home without Mother. And so at the level or the sphere of our function, a man seeks a mate and she becomes the mother in his home, and his concern for mother is not limited to his own personal mother. Mother is in his home, even though his mother is not. Mother. In the likeness and the image of God, “male and female created he them.”

Mother God

Why have we not seen more of the revelation of Mother God?

Let us pause for a moment. How much of the revelation of Father God have we seen? Can we have a greater revelation of Father God than we have of Mother God on earth? Could it be? In a particular person it may seem to be so, but look at humanity, look at all of us together. Could we expect to have a greater revelation of Father God than we permitted of Mother God? Obviously the answer is No, no matter how we might try. Would Father God say, “It's all right. If you just reveal Me, I don't care whether you reveal Mother God or not. After all, She doesn't amount to much. She's just—oh well, forget about Her”? Does it sound as if the God of Love would express in any such fashion? No.

Here on earth, in the home as human beings know it, will the husband and father permit a recognition of himself that does not include a recognition of wife and mother? Perhaps in some distorted patterns it may seem to be so. But what man is there upon the face of the earth who would arise and say, “I have achieved this greatness, I have accomplished this great thing, without regard to any woman anywhere. Look how great I am. I have never had a woman's influence in my life, never a woman's inspiration,” and so on? What great man, really great man, can you think of who achieved that greatness without regard to woman? If you can think of one you are better than I. I can't think of one single one. There may be some egotistical male somewhere who thinks he did, but I can't imagine his concept of his own greatness standing up very much, or else he is not telling the truth about the influence of the woman—one or the other.

If there is greatness there, woman is there somewhere, and we all know it. And how many examples we have seen—not that he would put her on display and subject her to some unpleasant experience of being projected too much into the forefront, for he is considerate of her in her nature, but he acknowledges her. He speaks for her, and he would not accept acknowledgment which attempted to reject her. There is the point. A real man, having achieved anything, may with due humility accept an acknowledgment, but if that assumed acknowledgment was a rejection of his wife or his mother, as the case may be—or both—would he accept the acknowledgment? Not if he is a man; he would reject the supposed acknowledgment, for to him it would be utterly empty and worthless if, to receive it, he must reject the one or ones who helped him in the attainment. Is God Himself less fair, less true, less honorable, than a man?

Human beings have floundered about, with their lips acknowledging God the Father, trying to achieve something by reason of begging God for this provision or that, but by the very attitude which human beings have shown they have rejected Mother God and then wondered why Father God was so elusive, so hard to find. “Why did He not acknowledge all the acknowledgments we have extended to Him?”

“O God, You are so great. O God, You are so wonderful.” We have repeated such things with our lips and proceeded in our lives, regardless of our lips, to reject Mother God. And God is honorable, and God is fair, and God is true. We did not have to have a consciousness of the idea of Mother God in order to acknowledge Her, although it is better that we do have that consciousness. How is it that we have rejected? Didn't the Master touch upon this point, for He said that there would be some who in that day said, “Lord, Lord, have we not done many wonderful works in Thy name?” And He gave assurance that He would reject them, saying, “Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity; for I know you not.” Why?

“Lord, Lord, have we not in Thy name done many wonderful works? We have given acknowledgment to Thee.” And the answer comes back, “Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity; for I know you not.” And God is fair, and God is honorable. And if these things had been done in His Name, would He refuse to acknowledge it? If there had been true response, would He reject it? Certainly not!

So we see another step in the picture. How is it that we have rejected Mother God? We claim with our lips to accept Father God. How are we to accept Him? Can we violate the dignity of the Divine Home and expect to be accepted of Father God? What man among us, having a wife and a home and perhaps children, if an intruder should appear and threaten the safety of his family, threaten the dignity of his home, an intruder who perhaps threatened to ravish his wife—what man among us in such a case would say, “Ah, dear intruder, proceed to do with my family as you will; do with my home as you will. It doesn't matter. I'll call you friend. I'll welcome you.” What man among us would do such a thing? I wonder. If there were one, I would not call him man. No, he would reject the intruder.

And so, do we expect God to be less honorable? And where is the Home? God created heaven and earth, and He planted a Garden eastward in Eden, the earth. This is the Home, right here on earth; this is the Home. And the intruder, devastating the Home, disregarding the integrity of it, attempting to violate—what?—the Body of Mother God. We have considered the violation of the Body of Father God. Have we considered the violation of the Body of Mother God? If in wilful self-activity, man intrudes upon the Home and seeks to violate the Body of Mother God, will Father God receive him? Or will He say, “Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity, I know you not”?

If God provided for the means of the manifestation of the Body of Father God, would He refuse to provide the means for the manifestation of Mother God? Would He say, “Now, Mother God, I'm going to keep You in heaven. I'm going to provide a means by which I can express Myself on earth. I'm going to have a body down there—that's part of Our Kingdom, part of Our Realm. I created that. But Mother God, You keep out of it now. I'm not going to give You a body down there. It will just be Me down there.” Down where? In hell? No!—a thousand thousand times No. For if God provided the means by which the Body of Father God should appear on earth, just so surely He provided the means by which Mother God should appear on earth. And in the manifestation of the Body of Father God and Mother God on earth—on Earth there should be a Home, a Place Divine, for the revelation of God, for a revelation of the Heavenly Home.

And yet we well know how restless we have been upon the earth, seeking home and not finding it. Has any man among you sought to produce a home, only to find that even with a loving wife, and perhaps with children, it did not turn out to be a fully satisfying home? And has any woman among you sought to establish a home, and even with a loving husband, and perhaps with children, to find that it did not turn out to be? Oh you tried so hard to make it so, you struggled, you did a thousand and one things; and yet that elusive Spirit of Home, for which your whole soul longed, somehow did not appear, and you either blamed husband or wife or children or friends or mother-in-law or father-in-law or someone, or you decided, “We can't know the true essence of Home here on earth. We will have to die and go to heaven, and then we will find the true Spirit of Home. We will have to consider ourselves as pilgrims here, pausing for just a little while on our way Home to Heaven.” Some have come to such a conclusion, but it is not the truth.

If we have not known Home on Earth it is because we have not known on earth the true provision of Father God and the true loving care of Mother God. How could we think to find Home on earth without Mother God? It would be so foolish for us to make the attempt. And this earth is to be the Home where the Master taught men to pray, “Thy kingdom come.” Where? In heaven? Presumably it is already there. Where? On Earth! “Thy kingdom come”—Thy control be established here on earth. “Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven”—as it is in heaven, which would include Mother God, the manifestation of Mother God on Earth as surely as the manifestation of Father God, and then the sense of Home. What did we do when we as human beings fell? We drove Mother God from Her Home on Earth.

Let us consider your body as a human being, man or woman. You have in that body the elements of the positive and the negative aspects of being, but, male or female, there must be a balancing out in the expression of life in relationship to male and female. Home. If the home be desecrated, would Father God depart from it and leave Mother God to suffer the indignities of the intruders? Certainly not! He might come Himself, as Father God, to see if the Spirit of Home could be established on earth, if it was safe to bring Mother God into it. But do you think He would bring Mother God into it until it was safe for Her to appear? I don't.

There may be some creatures claiming the male aspect of being who, returning to a place where there might be danger, a place where intruders had come, would pause well outside the gate and say, “Now, dear wife, we are back home. We are back home. I don't know whether it is safe for us. You go in and see.” There might be some male creatures who would talk that way, but no man. And how much less God. Yet we expect the revelation of Mother God on earth when it isn't safe for Her to appear?

When the revelation of Father God was made manifest on earth through the body of our LORD, the treatment that He received was such that He decided, “It's all right now, I'll send Mother God into the world”? No, not quite! He insisted that the intruder be cleared out, that the Home be made safe. And then what did He say? And then the body of those who responded and yielded should be—what?—“as a bride adorned for her husband.” The manifestation of Mother God must be through human beings, and that manifestation will not, cannot, come in the sense that makes the reality of Home until the wilful intruders have been cleared from the Home.

And then how shall the body of responding ones be received? There is that which is portrayed here in the Blueprint as presented in Revelation: The Lamb's Wife, that which is prepared as a Bride adorned for her Husband, which is to say the beginning of the manifestation of Mother God, the means by which we may come to know Mother God. But we cannot expect God to send the full revelation of Mother God into the world, or to cause Mother God to be made manifest, if She is to be treated as the world treated Him. We must do something. We could speculate from now, on the nature, the wonder and the beauty of Mother God. We could talk about Her. We could do all kinds of foolish things, but if we are concerned about having a Home on Earth, let us prepare the way and establish a place that is safe, so that God may allow, Father God may allow, not only the manifestation of His own being but the manifestation of Mother God on Earth. There are yet many things which we might consider, but this concludes our meditation for tonight.

© emissaries of divine light

Sex #3 — The Male And Female Principles Of Being

Sex  #3

YouTube  Audio

The Male And Female Principles Of Being

Uranda  April 29, 1954 a.m.

In our meditations we have been considering together the basic principles of being in relationship to what we have called sex. In one sense we can say that the word "sex" relates to the distinguishing characteristics of the male principle and the female principle. If we limit our concepts to the distinguishing characteristics physically we are bound to enter into a great many distortions in consciousness. But if we consider the distinguishing characteristics in relationship to the male and female principles of being we can see the application, extending all the way from the amoeba, which we were considering yesterday, to man, to man's relationship with God, and into all spheres of creation, the solar system and the universe. So it is vitally important that we understand these principles in their relationship to the One Law—the basic Law of Being.

In relationship to principle we have recognized law—principle, creative law. We were brought forth on earth in the image and likeness of Deity, of God, to express exactly the same principle as that which expresses through God, under exactly the same laws. God is subject to the same laws to which you are subject. To try to imagine that God is somehow superior to the laws of His own Being, and that He arbitrarily imposes law here and there, would be a very serious error, and it is an error in consciousness which is very prevalent throughout the body of mankind. But once we begin to realize that God functions under exactly the same laws that we do, we will realize that we have no more business rebelling against those laws than God has, and we realize that if God did not accept those laws He would not be God. It is because God does accept those laws in relationship to Himself, and in relationship to all creative action, all Divine action, that He is God. We are to share with Him the expression of that which He is on earth.

The means by which we may share that expression must necessarily be seen as something holy and sacred, partaking of the nature and the being of the Divine. This means by which we as human beings may share is basically the physical body. Inherent with the physical body, in this means of expression, we have the mind and the emotional nature—and remember that includes the subconscious aspect, or the memory aspect, of being. The means of expression must be as holy and sacred as that which is to be expressed. The means of expression cannot be less sacred, less holy, less Divine, than that which is to be expressed. We say and accept, at least theoretically, that man is the means by which God is to express in action on earth, and yet man, in self-active function, having separated himself from God, has produced an evil state in himself. Evil is the result of tangent function, function at a tangent with the Law of Being, or the result of incomplete action. All evil is incomplete action actually, and we need to realize that—incomplete action either because it is impossible for it to complete, because it is on a tangent, or incomplete because the human being did not persevere or maintain the cycle, remain centered, and let that cycle complete.

All evil, without any exception whatsoever, is the result of incomplete action. But there are two primary causes of incomplete action: tangent action which is self-active function at its worst, or action more or less in the correct direction in relationship to law but not properly sustained and maintained so that the cycle may be completed. This failure to have something maintained and properly sustained comes about through the absence of some of the factors which should be in action in relationship to the cycle. Human beings do not pause to consider their own lives with as much wisdom and sense and understanding as they approach the planting of a garden. And the Garden of God, or the Garden of Eden which is planted eastward in Eden, is a means by which this pattern of relationship between man and God has been illustrated in the Biblical portrayal.

Now if we remember these things, let us go back for the moment to the amoeba, back to the point of the basic manifestation in form of the male and the female principle. Here in the nucleus there is that which allows the focalization and function or action of the male principle. And what is the basic aspect of this male principle? It is the positive aspect of the One Law. And then we have the form which permits the focalization and action or function of the female principle, which is the negative aspect of the One Law. We see that the two aspects of the One Law are absolutely interdependent and that if either one—if such a thing were possible—if either one were absolutely separated or segregated from the other, it would be meaningless. We can see that it is completely wrong to imagine one aspect of the Law as being superior to the other.

The human mind, discolored by all of the false concepts in the mass consciousness, has tended to imagine that somehow the positive aspect of the Law was better than the negative aspect of the Law, and if someone in the negative aspect of the pattern could just get over into the positive aspect of the pattern it would be a better place, a better condition or something of the sort, which is not true. Each aspect is equally important, and that is the point that we need to bring to clear focalization in consciousness this morning. In a successful marriage, for instance, there is a pattern of wholeness because of the factors which each party to the marriage brings into the picture—a pattern of wholeness. And true wholeness results in the manifestation of wholesomeness. To whatever degree there is a lack of wholeness we begin to sense a lack of wholesomeness, and if that lack goes to the extreme there is a marked lack of wholeness and a marked lack of wholesomeness. That which is wholesome speaks of life in action.

We realize that every cell in the body functions on the basis of this Law, so with respect to every one of the billions of cells in your body there is the positive and the negative. Therefore the positive and the negative are in you, just from the standpoint of the cellular structure of your body. But it is more than that. You have the positive and negative aspects of being in many, many ways. And we see the application of the same principle, over and over again, in the body which appears in the solar system, which needs to be remembered at this point—the sun, positive to the earth; the earth, negative to the sun. But the moon is negative to the earth, and the earth is positive to the moon. The earth as a planet has a dual function here which connects the moon and the sun—the earth, positive to the moon but negative to the sun. And so we begin to see that every form of manifestation is in actual fact both positive and negative.

We have the terminology of the positive and negative aspects with respect to the level of being; but you, the human being, in relationship to your consciousness, your self-awareness, you are positive to the body, shall we say, the physical body as such. But the physical body in its turn has to be positive to something else. So the negative aspect, even in the amoeba, must be positive to something. Remember, in the portrayal of the amoeba as we witnessed it in the movies, there was a foreign object which came into the picture, entered through the skin or outside portion of the amoeba, but there was no action upon it other than repelling. Now suppose this foreign object had gotten into the body of the amoeba—something that did not belong there—and suppose the nucleus, the male principle, the core, undertook to be positive toward this foreign element, and suppose the female part of the body of the amoeba decided to be negative. "I'm negative," says the little amoeba body. "I'm negative, so I am going to be negative to this. I will not let it be cast out. I am going to retain this; I think it's pretty good. I think it looks nice; I think it ought to be here." And suppose the negative part of the little amoeba said, "I will keep it. I am going to be negative to this. I am negative anyway, and I will hold it here." The moment the little female part of the amoeba became negative to this, it became positive to the male part of the amoeba, because it undertook to do something contrary to what the male part intended to do. The male part of the body wanted to repel this foreign object which had no real place in the body of the amoeba. If the female part shared that attitude, remained negative to the male part, and therefore was positive to the foreign object, the foreign object soon slipped right on out and was gone. The foreign object, then, didn't hurt the body of the amoeba. But if the female part had failed to function properly under the Law, the foreign object would have remained in the body and in time would certainly, just by its presence, have hurt. But the presence of the foreign object would not have been the primary cause of hurt in the body of the amoeba, because we see that it would have been the change in pattern.

The negative aspect of the amoeba, in order to be negative to the foreign object, would have had to establish a tangent pattern of purpose, a pattern of purpose at a tangent in relationship to the purpose of the male part of the body, and consequently the female part would have become positive toward the male part and the life of the amoeba would have been destroyed. A foreign object would not have been the cause. It would have appeared, perhaps, to the consciousness of the female part of the amoeba that it was the cause, but it would not have been the cause. The cause would have been the change in attitude, the change in the vibrational factors at work in the amoeba.

We noted that oxygen was received into the body of the amoeba and the poisonous gas, carbon monoxide, was cast out, it moved out. Now can you duplicate that? You want oxygen in and you want this other gas out, one trying to move one direction, the other going to move the other direction. You say, "Well, I can breathe. I can take a deep breath. I can bring air in." But can you make the oxygen go into your body? Not by intellectual gymnastics you can't. So the amoeba can't, and you can't. What is it that causes something to come in and something to go out in the amoeba? What is the secret of life? Is that not what we are studying here?—a consideration of sex in relationship to the basic form of life, so that we can begin to more clearly understand what life is and how it manifests. If we can begin to understand the secret of life in the amoeba, we can begin to understand it in relationship to ourselves in the more complex organism. But here is an instrument that we call the amoeba, that has for its purpose the manifestation or formation of the Law in action, a form through which the Law may operate, the basic Law, the Law of the positive and the negative.

Now we have mentioned that Life is a child. We say that the Spirit of Love and the Spirit of Truth brought to union give birth to Life. Truth includes the elements of design and control, the means of comprehending purpose and principle. We say, principle is God Principle. God Principle must have some means of action. God Principle in action we call Love. God principle in action in the sense of the positive or cohesive elements, the working of the Law, is Love. But Love, or the positive aspect of God Principle, must have a means of action—a means of action—and the means of action we call Truth. The power of action we call Love; the means of action we call Truth. The result of the working of the power of action through the means of action produces Life in that which is acted upon. So there must also be not only the power of action, not only the means of action, but that which is acted upon. And that which is acted upon we call substance.

"How did substance come to be?" the mind might ask. "What was before substance?" I think the subject will be cleared in your other classes, but I believe we should bring it in for a moment here. Where there is to the human mind nothing—if it be truly nothing and not merely the appearance—it is a vibrationless state. If there are no vibratory factors at work it is unformed, and the unformed in space is that in which there is no vibration. If this that is without form in the deep of space is acted upon, in the sense of the One Law, the positive and the negative, vibration is established in that which is vibrationless, and the nature of the vibratory pattern will determine the nature of the substance that is formed. So the original creative action in relationship to the planets, or the solar systems for instance, was not an attempt on the part of God to make something out of nothing. It appears to the human mind to be nothing; but it is the vibrationless, that which is, in other words, static. The static condition of the unformed can be changed into a vibrant condition. As rapidly as the vibrant pattern begins to be present in the realm or region of the unformed, it will no longer be unformed, because form begins to appear as soon as the vibrant expression is established.

Everything is vibration, the vibrations of which we are aware, for instance, in relationship to light, the long, slow vibrations or the highly speeded-up vibrations in the range of light. The same principle applies in the range of form. As soon as the vibrational intensity in relationship to physical substance reaches a certain point, it is beyond the range of the physical vision to see, and so we classify it as the invisible realm of being or form, the invisible vibrational pattern. This invisible realm relates to ourselves, as we have noted from the standpoint of the mind, for instance, because you can't see mind and yet it is there. You can't see your feeling or emotional nature. You can see the results of it, but it is invisible. So we are definitely related, as physical forms which may be seen, with invisible vibratory patterns which cannot be seen with the physical eye. This vibratory pattern goes on up, and if there be a means of perception in the higher range of vibratory pattern, then the form of that pattern is not invisible.

In order to avoid a great deal of unnecessary confusion or tragic confusion, in order to make the different parts of creation have real meaning, God provided that there should be a means of perception at each level, a means of perception peculiar to that level, and that would allow a definite division point with respect to function on the different levels. For instance, here in what we call the physical world, the world of humanity, we have the means of perceiving in a certain range, a means of perceiving by vision, by touch, etc., and whatever vibrational substance is in that range may be seen or perceived by us. And it is the limit of perception, particularly visual perception, which establishes the limits of our realm of living. But for the next higher vibratory level there is likewise a means of perception just as real in relationship to that level of form as our means of perception is real to our level of form. This establishes the different levels—not because there is a separation between the two levels, for the two levels are in absolute contact; there is no break between them; they move into each level, or the vibratory patterns move into each level, without any break whatsoever. It is one thing.

The differentiation comes in relationship to the perception and not to the reality of form, and to the degree that we see that, we can realize, intellectually at least, that what is invisible to our eyes, or our other methods of perception, is not absent—it is there. There is not a dividing line in the sense of separation. There is simply the extent to which we may see. I can see to the top of yonder rimrock, and if I were to say there is nothing beyond that, it is the end of the world, you would know I didn't know what I was talking about. But if you go to that point, you can see beyond; and if you go the limit of that point, you can see beyond, and so on. And there is no point of division. So that which is established by reason of the limits of our perception tends to confuse the consciousness and establish a feeling of separation, and the feeling of separation establishes an attitude toward that which is above which is the same as the little female amoeba body here forgetting about the positive center of its own being and becoming negative to the foreign object which has penetrated into it.

So the vibrational patterns extend all the way up and down, from the base in the unformed to the Central Point of Being in the Cosmos, and there is no break, no dividing line, in the sense of being or form or function, from one point to the other. From the base of the unformed to the Center of the Cosmos it is one, all connected up, all unified, but the various aspects of it are distinguishable on the basis of the levels of the ability to perceive. If we see that, we can cease this attitude which causes us to forget the Core of our own Being.

Tonight we have a service continuing the one begun on Sunday evening [greatcosmicstory.blogspot.com/father-and-mother-aspects-of-god.html], and I am bringing all of this to focus in relationship to our anticipated meditation this evening. But you begin to see that Mother God, the female aspect in relationship to our level of being, has been ignored so thoroughly because She was not there. And that is why we don't have a Home, why we don't have a Paradise, why we don't have an earth in its perfect state.

Where did Mother God go,

and how can we get Her back Home?

The point is that the Core of Being, as far as we are concerned, is, as we have noted before, Father God. We say, "Remain centered in God," the Core of Being, the Center of Being. But the Core of Being, as perceived, can have no meaning except as it functions on the level where there is perception; in other words if function is not permitted in the range of perception it is as if it were not. We need to realize that the meaningfulness of God must be allowed to manifest in the level where we can perceive it before it can have meaning to us, for the meaning to us must be in the level where we can perceive. We do not deny that God is somewhere else, in the invisible realm or heaven, or whatever you want to call it. But that which is of God, that which is of spirit, that which is of heaven, can have absolutely no meaning to us, no real value to us as far as our intelligence is concerned, our self-awareness, our pattern of direction and function, unless it manifests in the level where we are.

Now we begin to see how it is that human beings, sensing, perceiving, that the adequate manifestation of Deity was not in form and active in the level where they are, have wanted to get to some other level. They wanted to go to heaven, because the human consciousness did not perceive the means by which God could be allowed adequate action in the level where they do perceive. Now here is one of the vital points in relationship to clearing of consciousness and effective function in the days to come, because we have seen that the realm of form extends all the way from the base in the unformed to the Center of the Cosmos. There is no place in that range where form is not. Form is there, real form, form just as real as any that we know. But we do not perceive form other than within our range of perception, so meaningfulness of that is limited to its manifest influence in the range of our perception.

Clearing this, we begin to see that we have been like the foolish body, the female body of the amoeba, that neglected to keep centered with its Core, and a foreign object came in, and instead of ignoring the foreign object, in the sense of not responding to it, in the sense of remaining centered with the Core, we have established a division between ourselves and the Core, a division which is not real in the sense of reality but is real in the sense of functional patterns. Now there is the difference—not a division in the sense of reality, not a division in the sense of form, but a division in the range of functional patterns, and that includes perception. So the female body began to act as if the foreign object were a part of the divided nucleus. It began to act as if the foreign object were a part. Then the foreign object was contained, and this that had been negative to the nucleus became positive to the nucleus and would be separated from the nucleus, and life could not continue. The manifestation of life would cease. And there we have the basic cause of death.

We are interested in life, that life may increase in ourselves and in those whom we serve. Life, we remember now, is the Child of the power to function [Love] and the means of functioning [Truth]. The means of functioning at this particular level we see as the body of the amoeba, including the nucleus. Now how does it function? What is this jellylike substance in the cell or in the amoeba? What is that jellylike substance? What should we call it? What is it called? Protoplasm. And what does that mean? First form, or first substance. Protoplasm. In other words this that is in the jellylike body of the amoeba is one step further along the way than what we ordinarily think of when we say pneumaplasm, isn't it? Just one step forward into the realm of what we call the solid. It is essentially, then, pneumaplasm in its nature, isn't it? Now this more solid substance, instead of having the nature of spirit, as pneumaplasm does, begins to have the nature of substance. When we get many cells together on the basis of what we call flesh here, we say, "Now that is solid." But what makes it solid?

Isn't there jellylike substance in all those cells in the flesh? Isn't that what you have been realizing in your considerations? When you go to give an attunement, what are you doing? You are attempting to do what? You are going to make this person get well, or "I see this person well." You are going to visualize, or what? Actually you are setting up a vibratory field on the basis of what? God principle—the power to act and the means of action, Love and Truth, which must be in yourself: a dual pattern here, positive and negative, which gives birth to Life. But if you see this dual pattern of yourself which is positive and negative, then to the person whom you are serving, if you are really serving, you are what? You are all positive. Even the negative aspect of you is positive, just as the negative aspect of the amoeba had to be positive toward the foreign object. And if the nucleus was positive, and the negative aspect of the amoeba remained positive with the nucleus, the foreign object passed right on through and was gone. But that meant that the negative aspect of the amoeba had to be positive toward the foreign object, not negative.

So it is the control of the direction in which we are negative, or responsive, that is going to determine the results in our lives, control of the direction of response. "According to your response, so be it unto you." That is the basis on which the pattern functions here in the amoeba. All right, as a server, and a servee is there, you may be ever so gentle, you may be ever so considerate, you may be ever so patient, but you are positive. Here is a part of the body of the amoeba that has a foreign object in it; it is sick, ill, not functioning right; something is there that ought not to be, and there is an absence of something that ought to be. So you are a positive, you are a part of the nucleus, and if this person who is supposed to be a servee is positive toward you, what is going to happen? If in his consciousness, in his identity of himself as a person, he is positive toward you, he is going to be repelled out of you, away from you. But if in consciousness, in functional pattern, he remains negative to you, a part of the Core of Nucleus, then he is a part of the female body of the amoeba, and the foreign object which relates to himself, or disturbs his pattern of function, is going to be cast out of him.

Now he is going to be cast out of the body of the amoeba if his identity of self-awareness is established in relationship to his ill condition, because he is going to be responsive to that, and this foreign object is going to be cast out. So he is cast out with it in such a case. But if his identity of consciousness is established in relationship to the Core, by being responsive to you as a server, and he remains steady in that, and you are truly—not just claiming but in actual fact—a part of the Core or the nucleus, then the foreign object, that which does not belong in other words, is cast out of his body and thereby cast out of your body. But remember that the person whom you serve is a part of your Body. You are not dealing with someone else over here. There is a differentiated form, yes, a different focalization of identity, but if you are a part of the Core, the nucleus, then that which is in the field here, the person who has come to you, is a part of your Body, not just someone else's body that you are going to do something with. Every one of you here, you are all a part of My Body. If I had not received you into My Body you would not be here. You may say, "Well I came of my own free will." You see, My Body is like the amoeba. It might go around, it might withdraw, it might look unshapely sometimes, but you would not be here if I had not received you into My Body, the body of the amoeba.

Now we are getting down to where we belong, aren't we? If someone comes and I receive that person into My Body, and there is a beginning of response, an acceptance of centering, of sharing as the female body of the amoeba has to share with the nucleus if the foreign object is to be repelled, cast out, then the individual identifies himself with the Core, and that which is unreal in himself begins to be dislodged and removed step by step. But if at some point along the way he finds his attunement of self-awareness more securely established in something that is being cast out than it is securely established in the nucleus, then he becomes the foreign object—not because I wanted it so, but because he made the choice. And so the person is repelled out of My Body, my amoeba, instead of just the ill condition in consciousness or body or whatever it may be.

Now you begin to see more clearly the application of the principle which the Master used when He was talking about His Body. Human beings have imagined that He just meant the body of the man that was called Jesus, and somehow the physical body of the man Jesus was all of this mysterious something—but His Body includes us all, whether we know it or not, whether we perceive it or not. We have to begin to perceive it before that fact can begin to have meaning to us, because He is the Center of the Core of the amoeba in which we live, which is this earth, because this is an amoeba in the Body of the Cosmos. We are not amoebas; we are just a part of an amoeba.

He is the Center of the Nucleus and we are all in His Body

As you consider these factors and we continue with our meditations, you will be, step-by-step, in a better position to begin to see what life really is and how we can with intelligence and understanding function in relationship to it. Function? Oh, the power to function, and the means to function. Now the Master said, "The means to function is here. And ye shall know the truth, the means to function, and the means to function shall make you free to be what you ought to be in the body of being."

© emissaries of divine light