Illumination

Alan Anderson Christopher

Description

A metaphysical account as well as the author's own experience of illumination. This writing is a step into the light of a procreative metaphysics as well as being the author's most autobiographical statement. "The Man and Woman Spiritual Center is only expressed in an actual touch between a man and a woman. It cannot be expressed in any other way. That touch may range from a momentary conscious recognition to a full embrace, but a touch, one to another, it is. The Spiritual Center is not expressed through belief, pledge, worship, ritual, or the paying of alms. It is not something that can be institutionalized, dogmatized, or ratified. There isn't any prescribed path to take, master to follow, or status to attain for its expression. There is only a man and a woman, touching and expressing creation together."Illumination

Sujets

• Philosophie et théologie
• Dating
• Mind
• Body
• Spirit

Informations

• Publié par: First Edition Design Publishing
• Date de parution: 02 octobre 2012
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781622871858
• Langue: English

Extrait

Illumination
Christopher Alan Anderson


First Edition Design Publishing, Inc.
Illumination



Christopher Alan Anderson
Illumination
Copyright 2012 Christopher Alan Anderson
ISBN 978-1622871-85-8

Published and Distributed by
First Edition Design Publishing, Inc.
September 2012
www.firsteditiondesignpublishing.com



ALL R I G H T S R E S E R V E D. No p a r t o f t h i s b oo k pub li ca t i o n m a y b e r e p r o du ce d, s t o r e d i n a r e t r i e v a l s y s t e m , o r t r a n s mit t e d i n a ny f o r m o r by a ny m e a ns ─ e l e c t r o n i c , m e c h a n i c a l , p h o t o - c o p y , r ec o r d i n g, or a ny o t h e r ─ e x ce pt b r i e f qu ot a t i o n i n r e v i e w s , w i t h o ut t h e p r i o r p e r mi ss i on o f t h e a u t h o r or publisher .
Foundation of Man and Woman Balance
www.manandwomanbalance.com
Preface
This work represents the completion of my own journey, which began with The Man and Woman Relationship—A New Center for the Universe, from philosophical enlightenment to illumination. Primarily, it continues my investigation into the Man and Woman Relationship, now focusing on the areas of imagination and illumination. This work is also my most personal one. I feel it is time to shed some light on aspects of my own growth.
This work also allows me the opportunity to pay my respects to my own mentor, Walter Russell, a man who saw most deeply into the secrets of creation. I have quoted freely from his great work The Universal One. In turn, I would like to thank Margaret Ruhe of The University of Science and Philosophy for this permission.
Also, I would like to acknowledge my parents, Stanley M. and Mary Jane Anderson, without whose support my writings never would have made it into print.

C.A.A.— April 12, 1989
Santa Rosa, California
Table of Contents
Introduction
Part 1—Imagination
Imagination
The Process of Creation
The Unknown Origin
Sexual Desire
Consciousness
Reality and the Limit of Consciousness
The Manifestation of Idea
Imagination and Illumination
Purity and Vibration
Vision and Paradigm
Imagination and Insanity
Parapsychology Reviewed
Romantic Bearing
Imagination and Freedom
Desire What You Will
Part 2—Great Imaginations
Early Influences
Later Influences
The Man and Woman Relationship: A New Center for the Universe
Part 3—Into The Light
The Religious Model
The Figure of Jesus
Is There A Force of Evil?
Does God Intervene?
Spiritual Need and Happiness
The Truth Shall Set You Free
Surrender to Love.
Purity of Heart
Thy Will Be Done
Let There Be Light
Part 4—Illumination
A History
My Time Has Not Yet Come
Illumination
Epilogue—The Man and Woman Spiritual Center

There is a place within the soul of every man and woman
where all problems cease to exist.
Introduction
Illumination as a work is being presented in four parts. Part 1 deals with imagination. It is through the vehicle of imagination that we may step into illumination both philosophically and experientially. Part 1 sets the metaphysical boundary, if you will, from which we may step beyond ourselves into illumination.
Part 2 of this work gives examples of great imaginations—specifically those thinkers who have influenced my own thoughts. In many ways, Part 2 is an account of my own intellectual and visionary development.
In Part 3, I begin the step from imagination to illumination. I use the vehicle of religion to take this step into the light . In a certain fashion it is still up to each one of us, if we so choose, to claim that step for ourselves.
Part 4 is the accounting of my own step into illumination, not so much as a statement of fact but as an imagination that can no longer journey elsewhere.
I conclude this work with an epilogue on whatever the future may hold.
Part 1 - Imagination

Imagination
What is imagination? According to Webster’s Dictionary imagination is: a) the act or power of forming mental images of what is not actually present: b) the act or power of creating mental images of what has never been actually experienced or of creating new images or ideas by combining previous experiences.
The above definition may not be the most concise one available but for our purposes it is as good a place as any to begin. For myself, I find two interesting aspects to this definition. One is that imagination is an act or power of forming or creating something. Imagination, then, is realized through the initiation of action or force bringing forth a creation of something. We could simply say that imagination is instigated by creative force, although we would need to clarify the term creative force.
The other part of the definition I find interesting is the aspect of forming or creating (mental images) of what is not actually present or what has never been experienced. If something is not present or has not been experienced, where then does one get the “idea” for it? In a certain sense, imagination is the term we give for the action by one of bringing something forth out of the “nothing” that is not present nor has been experienced. But how can something be created from nothing, be it a mental image or physical form? This is a question that has perplexed thinkers for aeons. I am not sure I can satisfactorily answer that question myself, at least not until we have a grasp on what nothingness is, or isn’t, and what somethingness is as well, along with some clarification of the parameter or boundary of consciousness, existence, and the creative force(s). After all, if we are going to understand imagination and the issue of “out of nothing,” we must do so while being something, namely ourselves, at least if this is to have any significance to us.
The correlation between imagination and creation, or the creative, begins to become more apparent. Creation itself is to beget or bring forth. To be creative is to bring forth something original or imaginative. If we could obtain a firm grasp on the creative process itself, we would do much in the way of clarifying the mystery of imagination. The two central issues we will need to focus on are the forces(s) of creation and the nothingness out of which creation is brought forth.
The Process of Creation
To delve into the creative process first assumes that there is such a thing to delve into. What is inferred by the term process is that there is an inherent structure or order to creation thus its nature as a process of creation rather than as some haphazard movement without any underpinning. But can we assume that? Can we assume anything fundamental about creation, existence, life, or this universe in which we find ourselves.
One thing we are able to assume about the process of creation is that we have experienced such a thing. We have this experience due to the existent situation in which we find ourselves when inquiring into this issue. That situation is one of relationship, we being a distinct creation in relationship to the otherness surrounding us thus our ability to inquire into things and ideas such as the process of creation. Existently, in relationship, we find ourselves to be a creator/creation. To create is to bring forth something that previously had not existed before. We are now back to the idea of something out of nothing.
Whenever we attempt to create, or think in any way, we find ourselves in a relationship. The bringing forth of something, be it an idea or a thing, creates the context of relationship between that specific idea/thing and everything else, whatever that may be. A something is always a something due to its relationship with something else. The fact that we exist subsumes our own self-other relationship.
Now, when we cease from thinking or creating (or individually being), that self-other relationship that we were a part of ceases to be. The parts of the relationship disappear. There is no longer a self-other context being held between them. The this-as-to-that duality that had distinguished the relationship has now vanished. The something(s) are now “nothing,” but only nothing in the sense that the something(s) are no longer distinct to each other. We may say that the unique qualities that defined one from the other are no longer being specified. The nothingness is but the state of non-distinction. The divided two are now a united one. They are the “same thing” if you will. Sameness of things is the same as nothingness/no separate thing.
In the creation of things, there is always this other aspect of nothingness (unity) involved. Given the inherent aspect of relationship, creation itself only has reference in relation to its opposite, which we may call decreation . Creation does not occur by itself alone but always in the context of creation-decreation. We cannot relieve ourselves of this existent situation—something is always referenced with nothing and vice versa. Within creation is its decreation; within decreation is its creation. There isn’t anything mysterious about this; it is just the way it is.
Given this relational context of creation-decreation, we can then unmask a certain inherent nature, and that is one of process or, more distinctly put, relationship-in-process. Process is just the sequential interplay of creation-decreation. Creation begets decreation and decreation begets creation, ad infinitum. To bring forth the idea of creation (or decreation) brings into play its opposite thus the relationship that is in the process of its own creation-decreation. Can we simply conclude that the structure or order of the creative process is implied in the term process as revealed in the relationship of creation-decreation? The one order of things, of this universe, may be no more than that of a relationship-in-process.
Keeping the idea of order in mind, let’s look at one of the standard arguments for the existence of God, the Cosmological Argument. In the Cosmological Argument*, it is concluded that the universe has a common unity and is on