 31. Christianity vs Jesus |
The social gospel—and the socially positive “point of view” that the State wants to generate and to support by various means—is not at all about transcending the “world” by Realizing the Divine Self-Nature, Self-Condition, and Self-State of Reality Itself. Likewise, that social gospel is not about transcending the apparently individual “self” by “self”-sacrifice in the Divine Self-Nature, Self-Condition, and Self-State of Reality Itself. The State is purposed to have people transcend their otherwise egoic (or even “Godward” and ecstatic) inclinations by means of productive work. In other words, the State likes the ideal of individuals who are “transcending themselves” by being devoted to the purposes of the State. The State generally tolerates the large-scale communication of “religion” only if the message is exoteric (or socially oriented). The ideal must lead the common individual to be a “good” social personality—doing his or her job, being honest, not making trouble, not creating disorder, not being lazy.
The State is not interested in any kind of teaching about transcending the egoic “self” and the “world” in Communion with the Divine Self-Nature, Self-Condition, and Self-State of Reality Itself. The State is not at all in that business, nor does the State like such teachings. The State—and its “official” cult of the time—did not like Jesus of Galilee. One could say that present-day “official” Christianity also does not like Jesus of Galilee—and for the same reason. The “official” Church has never liked the ecstatic Jesus, who taught everyone to be an ecstatic, like himself, and so to transcend the selfish “self” and the “world” (or the “flesh”) in the Spiritual Divine. Nobody has ever really liked Jesus of Galilee, except those people who are able to respond to the Truth in Spiritual terms. Such people have always been relatively rare.
If you are truly Transcendentally Spiritually Awakened, then you intrinsically transcend the (apparently separate) ego-”self” and the (apparently “objective”) “world”—in every moment. Even if the machine of the body-mind-complex is active in one or another manner—as it inevitably is, because it is born in the frame of space and time—no action need bind you in any manner whatsoever, if you will rightly understand the nature of the body-mind-”self” and the “world”, and if you will practice life on the basis of that right understanding.
This is the logic of the teaching of Jesus of Galilee, and (indeed) the logic of the teaching of all the great Spiritual Adepts. The great Spiritual Adepts do not come into the “world” merely to guarantee social order, nor can their teachings rightly be reduced to a social gospel. The teachings of Jesus of Galilee are not reducible to the “Ten Commandments” and some sort of socially positive emotion that is called “love”.
The conception of “works”—or performing action for the sake of becoming holy, “sinless”, deserving of heaven after death, happiness, fullness, success while alive—is discussed in the “New Testament”, just as it is discussed in the Bhagavad Gita and other traditional scriptures. If you understand the esotericism represented by such figures as Jesus and Krishna (or by the essential teaching communicated by the texts in which such figures are the principal characters), you will see that no traditional scripture recommends the way of the social-personality-for-its-own-sake. In other words, no true traditional scripture is a merely social gospel, or a gospel that (ultimately) is merely a justification for a positive social personality whose “salvation” lies in “works”, or the cultivation of positive behaviors. In fact, the traditional scriptures (such as the “New Testament” and the Bhagavad Gita) all teach the transcending of bondage to “works”, the transcending of the necessity (and the “effects”) of all ordinary action.
The society of the Jews at the time of Jesus of Galilee was “officially” based on exoteric “religious” laws. The Mosaic law, or the “Ten Commandments”, was preeminent—but there were also all kinds of other laws—including laws of the temple, as well as many and various forms of conventional “religious” belief and social morality that were propagated by the various sects among the Jews. The Judaic laws were, first of all, forms of intentional action, or “causes” that produced culturally acceptable “effects”. You were instructed about actions that were appropriate for you in your station—actions that would produce positive results. These became the laws, the conventions of social morality, the behavioral rules and the systems of behavior and action and idealism that were associated with each of the social classes (or states of life, birth, and social status).
Jesus of Galilee was teaching Jewish people, in the context of a society founded on the observance of a sacred system of laws. In that social context, it was assumed that, in general, people were going to act according to the laws or conventions of behavior that were communicated in the sacred culture. However, the great Spiritual teachers have always called people to notice that the laws of sacred culture tend to be misused and misapplied—becoming (thereby) the basis for bondage rather than Divine Realization, and the basis for unhappiness and seeking rather than Spiritual Happiness and Freedom. Thus, the “New Testament” does not merely teach the Mosaic laws, or even a new and summary principle of social morality that could be called “love”. In other words, the “New Testament” is not merely teaching social morality, via the idea of “love” as a general social concept. Nor is the “New Testament” teaching the Law of love-in-this- ”world” for the sake of this “world” merely. Rather, the “New Testament”—at least in its underlying original contents—is primarily teaching the esoteric Spiritual Mystery of the “Kingdom of God” (or the “Divine domain”).
