[MD] Unreality of Equality

[Joseph Bromley]

Hello Arlo.


>Greeting Joseph,
>
>[JCB]
>People who spend most of there time at the biological are less evolved than
>those that spend ost of there time on the social, and they less evolved 
>than
>those who operate mostly on the intellectual. Hence not equal. Few can spot
>this, few make it a question of value?
>
>[Arlo]
>Just feeling you out on this. I take it you would agree with the ancient 
>maxim:
>He who has not even a knowledge of common things is a brute among men. He 
>who
>has an accurate knowledge of human conerns alone is a man among brutes. But 
>he
>who knows all that can be known by intellectual energy is a God among men.
>
>Manly Hall comments on this (in The Secret Teachings of All Ages), saying 
>"Man's
>status in the natural world is determined, therefore, by the QUALITY of his
>thinking [italics, not capitals, in the orignal]. He whose mind is enslaved 
>to
>his bestial instincts is philosophically not superior to the brute; he 
>whose
>rational faculties ponder human affairs is a man; and he whose intellect is
>elevated to the consideration of divine realities is already a demigod, for 
>his
>being partakes of the luminosity with which his reason has brought him into
>proximity."
>
>When I was reading Hall, this passage (and others) jumped out at me because 
>of
>its correlation with the biological, social and intellectual levels of the 
>MOQ.
>(Hall lived 1909-1990).
>
>Hall further posited that that the great mass of people were primarily 
>"brutes
>and men", that in every age only a "few minds" rose to the level of
>"intellect". The great masses, then, in every age were "sheep", 
>necessitating
>exoteric, simplistic language to govern and guide them. While the "few" 
>capable
>of esoteric understanding would rise above and be capable of contemplating 
>and
>understanding the Divine. The Apostle Paul, in the Christian tradition, had
>said of the former that they are children, to be fed with milk, while the
>latter (the wise) were men to be fed with meat.
>
>Is any of this in parallel with what you are saying? Or am I way off base?
>
>Arlo

We have reached first base. The ball is in the air, will it be caught out or 
go for a home run? The runner keeps on running, he can not alter the chain 
of events now in place, he pursues his course of action, leaving it to fate 
and his awareness of the game around him. The fielders are trying there best 
to catch or run him out. There would be no game otherwise. The better the 
oposition the more one can improve ones game.

Regards Joseph.

_________________________________________________________________
Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters! 
http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters