Mental Science asks no one to accept any statements made in its behalf
that cannot be proven. We should attempt to prove each statement as we
build our premise, exactly as the investigator in any other science would
proceed to prove his findings.
While all Freemasons necessarily profess a belief in a "one living and
true God," else they could not be members of the Order, for the sake of
consistency a scientific reason should be established for that belief.
This seemingly is a world of opposites. Negatives at first glance
appear to be truths, but on analysis are not. Darkness, of itself, does
not exist. It is merely the absence of light. Ignoring the negative side
of the question but turning to the affirmative, let us build up a rational
belief in a Supreme Being.
We exit The Universe exists. We are conscious of both our own existence
and our surroundings. Consciousness is a degree of intelligence. That same
intelligence which makes us aware of our own existence and the existence
of the world in which we live forces us to admit the prior existence of
some creative force which caused both the universe and ourselves.
This is not an attempt to advance an argument to the individual who
says "we just happened." In fact he will not be reading these lines. Such
a view is so inconsistent with nature that it requires no answer from the
thinking person. Nothing in nature "just happens." There is always a
reason for natural action if we but find it, and we cannot malign the
Omni-present because the human mind cannot grasp the reason for some
particular thing and say "there is no reason, no cause." We must
ultimately come to th e conclusion that we and the Universe are the result
of definite, intelligent planning; in other words - THOUGHT.
The next step in an attempt to find a logical basis for belief is to
ascertain HOW we were created. Man the finite cannot comprehend the
INFINITE and, therefore, unaided, realize infinity, yet he must needs
attempt that very thing. Fortunately, there is in every man that which
impels him to seek the infinite, and by means of it apprehend sufficient
of the concept of infinity to pursue the proper train of thought.
The universe is distinctly material and, being material, there must
have been a time when it did not exist. Hence the Biblical statement: "In
the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." This provides a good
starting place, and, by applying the theory of negatives, can be restated;
"until created the EARTH WAS NOT." The Bible carefully states "CREATED,
not "BUILT." To "build" is to construct or rearrange out of existing
material. To "create" is to materialize something out of apparent nothing.
There is some question. as to the correctness of the translation of the
foregoing passage, the Hebrew word "ROSH" being involved. It is true that
"rosh" may be translated "beginning" but the best Hebrew authorities seem
to prefer "the head." Thus we are told that "ROSH HASHANA" means "the HEAD
of the year." It is not phrased: "the BEGINNING of the year." In
connection with this distinction of meaning it should be noted that "the
head" carries the inference of knowledge or wisdom. It is the seat of
wisdom. Thus this passage may well be translated: "IN WISDOM God created
the heavens and the earth."
Returning to the Bible we read: "In the beginning the earth was without
form, and void." That statement seems contradictory, for regardless of the
SHAPE of a thing it cannot be without form. If it exists as material,
whether round, flat or square, that is its form. From this one can only
conclude that the earth did not exist as matter. How then did it exist, if
in the beginning it was without form and void? Only as thought, an idea,
WITHOUT (MATERIAL) FORM, in the Universal Mind.
The suggested translation lends itself to this line of reasoning. If we
say "in wisdom" rather than "in the beginning," we immediately predicate a
"mental creation" preceding the material manifestation in form and space.
In another passage we read: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word
was with God, etc." "All things were made by Him, and without Him was not
anything made that was made." Again we change not the sense, but give it
actually more specific meaning if we translate: "In WISDOM was the wo rd,
etc."
Earth then, came into existence through the WISDOM of God and by the
word of God. What is a word, but the vocalization of a thought? A "word"
must be "THOUGHT" before it can be spoken. (We seek a "word," and the
reason for our quest is that we, too, may create by means of this word.) A
"word" being a spoken thought, we may now change the initial statement of
the Bible to read: "In WISDOM God THOUGHT the world into being."
Everything in nature indicates the absolute consistency of the Great
Universal Mind, hence we reason when we see the operation of physical
laws, that spiritual laws work on the same basis. The Infinite
Intelligence can arrive only at a perfect plan of operation, and that plan
is absolute.
In studying nature's laws as a starting point in the "seen" we can
conclude that the operation of spiritual laws in the "unseen" is similar.
Hence the conclusion can readily be reached that there is but one set of
laws, or one great universal law. It can be likened to that portion of a
spar seen above the water, because of which we know the portion under the
water of necessity exists.
Wheat planted in the ground produces wheat, and wheat only. Cattle bred
produce cattle, and cattle of the same type and breed. Man produces an
offspring of like form and intellect. If the absolute immutability of this
law could not be depended upon there could be no assurance of our own
continued existence, or of the continuance of the universe.
If, in the wisdom of Universal Intelligence, the operation of this law
in the material world is satisfactory, why not apply the same to the
spiritual world? This is the dictate of reason, and we may strengthen our
conclusion by the precept of the Bible, which the Mason is admonished to
use as "the rule and guide of his faith and practice."
The Great Teacher suggests the law of like producing like by several
questions he asks, as well as by directly stating it to be so. "Do men
gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" Also - "A good tree cannot
bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good
fruit." Again we are specifically told: "And God said, let us make man in
our own image, after our likeness." We have definitely concluded God is
not material, but spirit - Mind. He could not have referred to man's
physical body when he said "in our own image and likeness," so this can
only mean SPIRITUAL LIKENESS.
The Bible contains two separate and distinct accounts of the creation
of man. One which may be called the birth of the idea, or ideal, of man in
the Infinite Mind; the real spiritual "thought creation" as dearied in the
twenty-sixth and twenty-seventh verses of the first chapter of Genesis. In
the second chapter of Genesis, seventh verse, is found the description of
the physical creation, the actual making of the material body.
William James, writing on the theory of the secondary or subliminal
consciousness, says: "In certain persons, at least, the total possible
consciousness may be split into parts which coexist, but mutually ignore
each other." F. W. H. Myers suggests that the stream of consciousness in
which we habitually live is not our only one. According to Bramwell, from
whose book, Hypnotism, its History, Practice and Theory, we are here
quoting, Myers termed the "self below the threshold of ordinary
consciousness the subliminal consciousness, and the empirical self of
common experience the supraliminal."
Psychology teaches that we have two minds, or one mind capable of two
distinct functions. It is immaterial for our present purpose which view we
accept, but for the sake of clarity we will henceforth speak of two minds:
the objective, or Myers' supraliminal, and the subjective, which he
describes as the subliminal consciousness. The objective mind of man is
the manifestation of the Universal Mind, which is subjective upon the
objective plane.
The objective mind of man, with its ability to reason inductively, make
choices of its own and distinguish between good and evil, is the highest
work of all creation (in a material body) up to the present time. By
culminating in man, with his objective mind, evolution has at last
produced something which can go on of As own accord and volition.
While throughout the animal kingdom there is evidence of ability to
reason, and particularly in the higher animals does this approach more
nearly what man terms reasoning, it is man alone who has attained to the
eminence of being a free moral agent; free to make his own decisions, draw
his own conclusions and have cognition of the existence of the very
Universal Law which underlies the attainment of this stage of his
development
With the objective mind man makes his conscious decisions. It is the
seat of the ability to choose. HE HAS THE POWER OF CHOICE. It is the
objective mind which recognizes the fact and says: "I AM!"
The subjective mind is described as being impersonal, passive, directed
by the objective mind and having no will of its own. It faithfully follows
the dictates of the objective mind. It is proven beyond argument that it
is also the controller of bodily functions, as may be recognized when it
is realized that we do not consciously, objectively, direct the heart beat
or respiration. These other functions are not material to the present
study, so we particularly note the IMPERSONAL QUALITY of the subjective
mind for the present.
In a study of the characteristics of the subjective mind, its
impersonal nature may be better understood by observing its action in
hypnotism. Hypnotism is the displacement of the subject's objective mind
by the objective mind of the hypnotist, in order that the hypnotist may
directly make suggestions to the subjective mind of the subject.
Mental science teaches that the, subjective mind is impersonal, and
this is readily proven by hypnotism. In Bramwell's book, previously
quoted, he states relative to changes in personality: "Here the subject
[while under hypnotism] assumes the role suggested [by the hypnotist], and
speaks and acts in accordance with his conception of the part."
Another fact demonstrated through hypnotism is that the subjective mind
reasons entirely deductively, and is incapable of reasoning inductively.
In inductive reasoning conclusions are drawn from a number of known facts,
whereas deductive reasoning assumes two or more facts to be true, without
actual verification; but, if correct, then further conclusions must of
necessity be true.
Given the initial suggestion by the hypnotist, the subject will follow
through, DEDUCTIVELY even to the most minute detail, arriving at the
correct conclusion with a display of intelligence at times far superior to
the known ability of the objective mind of the individual. However, the
hypnotized subject will neither show any tendency, nor evince any ability,
to establish inductively the correctness of the original assumptions, no
matter how false, or even ridiculous, they may appear to the objective
mind of an observer.
Mental Science informs us that this subjective mind is the individual's
undivided part of the great subjective mind of the universe, that creative
force which brought us into being, and therefore we are like our Creator.
Science thus establishes that we are AS OUR CREATOR, and enlightens us as
to the real meaning of the Biblical statement that man is made in the
image and likeness of God.
So much for the present of Mental Science. However we hope to
subsequently establish the fact that Freemasonry and Mental Science are
synonymous. Through its careful and secret teaching Freemasonry has
preserved knowledge of Mental Science through the dark ages of ignorance,
so that in our more enlightened day, when a man has the right to think for
himself and express those thoughts openly, the great storehouse of
knowledge is found stocked with the fundamental ideas.
However, due to the necessity of secrecy in the past, this knowledge
was concealed in allegory and illustrated only by symbols. The full import
was unknown, even to some of those who zealously guarded it and were
instrumental in its preservation. For this reason, even today, it is not
an "open book" which may be read with ease. The knowledge IS ALL THERE,
but it is still "veiled in allegory and illustrated by symbols," and is
useless until laboriously dug out and exposed to the view of the
intellect.
This knowledge is ours for the asking. All we need do is knock at the
door of this storehouse of wisdom and "it will be opened unto us," but the
door is not equipped with an electric eye which will swing it open as we
pass. It takes a "distinct knock," and patience to gain this important
privilege. It demands a well formed PERSONAL DESIRE to give the knock and
patiently await a due time. We have encountered in the spiritual world the
law of the material world, and are dealing with personal desire. We mu st
first "form a favourable opinion" of this knowledge we seek, then request
admission. That request must be "unbiased by the improper solicitations of
friends, and uninfluenced by mercenary motives." It must be for a far more
noble and glorious reason: "a desire for knowledge and a sincere desire of
being serviceable to your fellow creatures." Finally, we must be able to
truthfully answer: "it is," when asked: "Is this of your own free will and
accord?"
