The Arising of Christ-Consciousness


So from where does Christ-Consciousness arise? Preston Harold gets right to the point…

Christ-consciousness appears to be sent from the unconscious domain. Before this light can enter consciousness, something in man must be equal to its action: Jesus says the will (the energy) must be as the Father’s, as One’s. He insisted that He, the light, was sent into the world, and that He expressed the will or energy of the Father, unapparent save in man.

Harold says Christ-consciousness is SENT into “the world,” the conscious domain, from the realm of the unconscious, the “kingdom of heaven.” Harold then quotes Eddington in explaining how light comes into the physical world:

…the individual wave-systems in the sub-aether are composed of oscillations too rapid to affect our gross senses; but their beats are sometimes slow enough to come within the octave covered by the eye. These beats are the source of the light coming from the hydrogen atom, and mathematical calculations show that their frequencies are precisely those of the observed light from hydrogen. Heterodyning of the radio carrier waves produces sound: heterodyning of the sub-aetheral waves produces light. Not only does this theory give the periods of the different lines in the spectra, but it also produces their intensities – a problem which the older quantum theory had no means of tackling. It should, however, be understood that the beats are not themselves to be identified with light-waves; they are in the sub-aether whereas light-waves are in the aether. They provide the oscillating source which in some way not yet traced sends out light-waves of its own period.


Harold comments on the difference between the beats and the light-waves being identical to Jesus’ understanding of His relationship to the Father:

An ancient who referred to himself as Light – and of the same “period” as the Father of all manifestation, God – might try to make clear that the “beats” in the “sub-aether” (or that unapparent source) are not to be identified with Himself, and that it is their action that produces the phenomenon, by saying: “I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.”

Perfect! Jesus’ awareness of himself as “light” shows the dwelling of Christ-consciousness within Him. Just as physical light is sent into the world from the aether, so Jesus’ awareness of Himself as light makes Him aware of being “sent” from the Father, or the beats in the sub-aether. We will continue to explore Jesus’ mission as “light of the world” in our next post. Until then, peace.



Much has been written on the concept of “Christ consciousness,” a term which has been interpreted different ways by different people. For anyone who is interested, a simple Google search for the term will bring up multiple hits to explore; there is even a “Center for Christ Consciousness” website! As for this blog, we will examine what Preston Harold understood by the description.

Harold describes the arising of Christ-consciousness as a person becomes equivalent to the idea of one:

Jesus’ drama depicts the Authority-Ego speaking to the multitude of personality images surrounding it. The group ponders, rejects, doubts, does not fully understand. Resistance continues until one in the group becomes equal to the idea of one – then light enters his consciousness. A scribe, raised to a “higher orbit of thought” as he listens to Jesus, says: “’Right, teacher! You have truly said, He is One, and there is none else but Him. Also, to love Him with the whole heart, with the whole understanding, and with the whole strength, and to love one’s neighbor as oneself – that is far more than all holocausts and sacrifice.’ [Jesus replies] ‘You are not far from the realm of God.’” The scribe has stated the concept of one and wholeness.


So for Preston Harold, Christ-consciousness is centered around a unitive awareness and vision in which all things are connected, beginning with the connection of humanity to God and neighbor. What might the result of this vision be when put into action? In his letter to the Phillipians the Apostle Paul tells us, “Let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.” True Christ-consciousness, it seems, leads to humility and servanthood. Preston Harold might say, “a higher orbit of thought leads to a lower valuation of egotism.”

But how does Christ-consciousness manifest in a person? How does a person “become equal to the idea of one?” Harold surmises…

Jesus tries to explain that the spirit or energy of truth is spread about in man in a manner by no means comparable to preconsciousness or to any image of self in the ego-group, but that as one’s superconsciousness is heightened, Christ-consciousness condenses in his mind, and like an “electron” becomes as a compact body moving around with his ego-group. This drama, He, Himself represented, and He must show that in life as man’s consciousness reaches a certain pitch of intensity, a vision of the Christ will emerge like a genie – in the finale one sees this happen.

This may explain how Christ-consciousness arises, but it doesn’t tell us exactly where it comes from, does it? We will explore this riddle in the next installment. Until then, peace.

Something Unknown Doing We Don’t Know What

Going back to Eddington’s statement in which he says “our particle can never have simultaneously a perfectly definite position and a perfectly definite energy…. Hence in delicate experiments we must not under any circumstances expect to find particles behaving exactly as a classical particle was supposed to…”, Preston Harold interprets this as it pertains to the ministry of Jesus:

Thus, Jesus, who in a delicate experiment made Himself a symbol of the “classical particle of God,” could not in truth behave as Messiah was supposed to, and He could not produce the “ideal classical particle,” God the Father, any more than the physicist can produce today the ideal iota of matter.


Harold goes on to explain how this ideal classical particle exists within humankind:

Men see in other men only their personalities – a wave group acting like a particle, a ego-group acting like a man; but just a searching the wave-group does not lead to the ideal classical particle, so searching the ego-group does not lead to the God-cell within man. This cell is “our Father” to the ego-group, is “my Father” to the Authority-Ego, h, and all of it that man may see is the form that surrounds it – the form of man, a being conscious of God within himself, as Son, one. In the divided conscious domain where super-, pre-, and subconsciousness operate, the ego-group may be likened to a cloud of electrons…


Eddington, again from his “The Nature of the Physical World,” describes to us the behavior of a cloud of electrons:

An electron decides how large it ought to be by measuring itself against the radius of the world in its space-directions. It cannot decide how long it ought to exist because there is no real radius of the world in its time-direction. Therefore it just goes on existing indefinitely…

We see the atoms with their girdles of circulating electrons darting hither and tither, colliding and rebounding. Free electrons torn from the girdles hurry away a hundred times faster, curving sharply round the atoms with side slips and hairbreadth escapes. The truants are caught and attached to the girdles and the escaping energy shakes the aether into vibration. X-rays impinge on the atoms and toss the electrons into higher orbits. We see these electrons falling back again, sometimes by steps, sometimes with a rush, caught in a cul-de-sac of mestastability, hesitating before “forbidden passages.”


Behind it all the quantum h regulates each change with mathematical precision….The spectacle is so fascinating that we have perhaps forgotten that there was a time when we wanted to be told what an electron is. The question was never answered. No familiar conceptions can be woven around the electron; it belongs to the waiting list. Similarly the description of the processes must be taken with a grain of salt…

Something unknown is doing we don’t know what – that is what our theory amounts to.

There it is! “Something unknown is doing we don’t know what!” Materialistic science hates to admit this. If they were to admit it, it would be tantamount to pulling the curtain back on themselves and exposing the materialistic-reductionist illusion which they use and manipulate to maintain their power, prestige, and to keep the money flowing. Why don’t we all try heed Eddington’s suggestion, which he applies to his own descriptions, and apply them to all scientific enquiry; let’s take it all with a grain of salt. This is not denying science, this IS WHAT SCIENCE IS SUPPOSED TO BE DOING IN THE FIRST PLACE. Certainly every scientific discovery made within the materialistic-reductionistic paradigm needs a few grains added to it’s recipe.

Preston Harold follows on Eddington’s electronic cloud descriptions:

In parallel, man’s ego-group bespeaks an unknown process – something unknown is “doing we don’t know what” – and one might say that, like an electron, a self-concept or an image of another which makes up the ego-group goes on existing indefinitely, but is relegated to the subconscious, or is repressed into the unconscious, not showing itself until some stimulus from the outside world calls it from latency. In man, the “something unknown” that, with mathematical precision, is doing “we don’t know what” can be only the Authority-Ego working to bring forth a genuine, classical elect-one: a personality in accord with one.

We will continue this train of thought in our next post. Until then, peace.

Scientific Fundamentalism

Following up from our previous installment on Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principal, Sir Arthur Eddington reminds us (from his book “The Nature of the Physical World”) that “our particle can never have simultaneously a perfectly definite position and a perfectly definite energy…. Hence in delicate experiments we must not under any circumstances expect to find particles behaving exactly as a classical particle was supposed to…”

“Awwww, but we don’t want to change,” say Eddington’s current day descendants. “We’ve always done it THIS way!” And ever since Eddington, Heisenberg, Einstein, Bohr, Planck, et al. blew the lid off the supposition that the material realm is the only basis for scientific understanding, most scientists have refused to acknowledge this scientific discovery of actual reality! the-sacred-nature-of-the-doctor-patient-relationship-by-dr-mark-gignac-11-638

The standard scientific paradigm remains to this day the model of materialistic reductionism, in spite of the fact that our quantum physicists completely destroyed this misguided belief years ago. Try to challenge the modern day principalities and powers in their department chairs and lab coats, along with their research dollars and institutional obstinance, and watch your career flounder as the modern inquisition system does everything it can short of burning you at the stake (because we’re much more enlightened nowadays, right?) to discredit and demean your research, theories, and theses. There’s nothing like an atmosphere of free and open inquiry, right? Hmph.

The fact is that even the ancients knew that reality was not materially based, but was rather based upon Spirit, energy, love. The Vedantic assertion that “All is Maya” is simply a statement of reality, that the very basis for our existence in the material realm is contradiction. Although the life of our senses is good and at times can certainly be a beautiful experience, it is not eternal and exists within the context of perceived dichotomies. When a Hindu asserts that “Everything is Brahman,” they are saying that Brahman is the ground from which everything that is manifests and exists, and without which nothing could manifest or exist. Brahman is the eternal principle; Spirit, energy, love. When we attempt to translate a reality from the realm of Spirit into the material realm, we can only come up with paradox – with contradiction (which shows us that the material proceeds from the spiritual).


Two opposite truths simultaneously co-exist! This cannot be to us; it must be “Either-Or.” “Both-And” is unacceptable! And so science based in materialistic reductionism continues on, pretending that Either-Or is the only choice when it knows that Both-And has already won the intellectual battle. This is terrifying to them! Science proverbially sticks its fingers in its ears and says to quantum mechanics, “I can’t hear you! La la la la la!” And of course these modern day cognoscenti are much more enlightened and advanced than those ancient religious nuts, right?


So what does Jesus further have to say or do concerning Eddington’s quote at the beginning of our post? That’ll have to wait until the next entry. Until then, peace.

Parables and Position


“The gist of it can be stated as follows: a particle may have position or it may have velocity but it cannot in any sense have both…the more we bring to light the secret of position the more the secret of velocity is hidden.”

Thus speaks Sir Arthur Eddington concerning Werner Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. Preston Harold tells us how Jesus conveyed this principle in a poetic way to his followers:

If an ancient’s pure thought led him to the realization of the “principle of indeterminacy,” how could he convey it? He must, of course, select a symbol to represent “position” and another to represent “velocity.” Jesus, light, allowed Himself to be called “teacher” or “Lord” – and He spoke thusly of teacher and scholar, of lord and servant:

A scholar is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his lord; enough for the scholar to fare like his teacher, and the servant like his lord. –Matt. 10:24-25

If teacher (or Lord) is seen to represent “position” and scholar (or servant) is seen to represent ‘velocity” this saying shows a new dimension. It would read: “Velocity (the time rate of change of position) is not greater than the speed of light. Therefore, velocity must share the limitations of light.” Thus Jesus, in saying that scholar and teacher “fare alike” indicates that at the limit, or when reduced to a point in space-time frame, “position” and “velocity” become alike.

It is quite a jolt to understand Jesus’ sayings in this way. But it certainly renders intelligible some of the difficulties in trying to interpret what Jesus is “really trying to get across.” Many excellent books have been written on the teachings and parables of Jesus, setting his teachings in the context of the cultural norms of the day and what would be the common Jewish understanding of Jesus’ hearers. But who among us would have thought that buried deep within those teachings all along were hidden the secret workings of the universe and creation/evolution? After all, even Jesus himself says that he has many things to tell, but that listeners of his time could not bear those teachings at that time and place. Here is another example from Preston Harold:

Jesus presents a parable of laborers who come early to the fields and laborers who come late, each receiving the same wage, and thus they fare alike: He concludes with these words, “So shall the last be first and the first last,” indicating the indeterminacy of both velocity and position – which is to say, man may measure only the one or the other aspect of a person or a particle: its “being” or its “becoming,” its position or its velocity.


Who among us hasn’t heard the parable of the laborers in the field and thought of its interpretation in the light of God’s “unfairness” or “grace,” and how God behaves in the exact opposite way that most of us would concerning the wages given at the end of the day? Who hasn’t put themselves in the place of the workers who agreed to the wage at the beginning of the day and worked all day, just to find out that they could have worked a fraction of that time for the same wage? How many times have we thought or heard that God does not act as the world does, and this parable proves the point; when in reality this parable is describing exactly the underlying basis and foundation for how the world does in fact work, no matter what one believes! Like all the other parables, it is a riddle of universal truth, it’s secrets waiting to be revealed to those with, as Jesus says, “ears to hear.” Preston Harold certainly had those ears, and has helped myself and others clear the wax out of ours as well. Until next time, peace.

Caught in a Net


Preston Harold considers a major predicament challenging scientists as they explore the world of matter and light, and the paradox that exists therein…

To grasp the problems confronting physicists as they probe the secrets of elementary energy, it is necessary to realize that the “classical particle” cannot be captured or pinned down for examination. The “treasure” or reality of matter and its place of residence in nature is hard to come by. Throughout His ministry Jesus tries to explain the elusiveness of matter – His words indicate that both the “treasure” and its place of being are never simultaneously possessed: “The Realm of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field; the man who finds it hides it, and in his delight goes and sells all he possesses and buys that field. Again, the Realm of heaven is like a trader in search of fine pearls; when he finds a single pearl of high price, he is off to sell all he possesses to buy it.” Today, the scientist knows much about fields in which a single pearl, the quantum h, is somehow traded, in which the treasure of energy is somehow buried.

In his book Creative Realism, Dr. Rolf Alexander states: “Quantum physics today gives us the picture of from ten to twenty qualitatively different quantum fields interpenetrating each other. Each fills the whole of space and has its own particular properties. There is nothing else but these fields…”


Preston Harold comments:

Jesus pictured (Dr. Alexander’s description), using a commonplace article as a symbol. He said: “Again, the Realm of heaven is like a net, which was thrown into the sea and collected fish of every sort.” A net is a pattern of nothing but “fields,” and fish are a good symbol to suggest the elusiveness of the classical particle which Eddington describes:

“A small enough stormy area corresponds very nearly to a particle moving about under the classical laws of motion; it would seem therefore that a particle definitely localized at a moving point is strictly the limit when the stormy area is reduced to a point. But curiously enough by continually reducing the area of the storm we never quite reach the ideal classical particle; we approach it and then recede from it again.”

To discover why, a fundamental general principle which Eddington ranks in importance with the principle of relativity must be examined. It is the “principle of indeterminacy,” presented by Werner Heisenberg…

We will explore Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle in our next installment. Until then, peace.

A Gathered Radiance

Golden Radiance Mandala 2

Sir Arthur Eddington said that the conflict between the quantum and classical theories of physics becomes sensitive in the problem of the propagation of light. It comes down to a conflict between the corpuscular theory of light and the wave theory. In defining how large a quantum of light is, he said it must be large enough to cover a 100 inch mirror, but small enough to enter an atom. Paradox and contradiction abound! He also goes on to say…

“We must not think about space and time in connection with an individual quantum; and the extension of a quantum in space has no real meaning. To apply these conceptions to a single quantum is like reading the Riot Act to one man. A single quantum has not travelled 50 billion miles from Sirius; it has not been 8 years on the way. But when enough quanta are gathered to form a quorum there will be found among them statistical properties which are the genesis of the 50 billion miles’ distance of Sirius and the 8 years’ journey of the light.”

Reflecting on Eddington’s statement above, Preston Harold meditates on how it parallels a particular teaching of Jesus:

An ancient symbolizing h in terms of “I” might convey that when the “statistical requirements are met” – that when a “quorum of quanta are gathered” – light will be there, by saying: “…where two or three have gathered in my name, I am there among them.” Jesus’ summary statement is not a riot act, unmeaningful to an individual thinking of himself in connection with light, space, and time. He simply says that God is Father, is love, that with God all things are possible – as He, Himself, symbolized that of each man which is like h, one totally committed to action, an indivisible unity that overleaps time and space, an “unbroken glory” as Jesus was upon the cross, a “gathered radiance,” as He was in life and death.


It is notable here that Harold mentions Jesus on the cross as an “unbroken glory.” According to Rudolf Steiner in his lectures on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Jesus’ words while on the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me” (Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani), can also be translated from the Aramaic as “My God, my God, how you have glorified me!” The word “sabachthani” is very similar to the Aramaic word “shevachthani,” which means “elevated,” or “glorified.” In his “The Return of the Mother,” Andrew Harvey tells of a German scholar of Aramaic who was researching the possibility that Jesus “may have been punning on the cross.” An ancient speaker of Aramaic could have heard these words from Jesus in both ways, therefore understanding that there was something special happening while Jesus was dying a terrible death. It does make sense to interpret the “light of the world” being glorified in death. After all, after Judas had left to hand Jesus over, Jesus said,

“Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify the Son in himself – and will glorify him immediately.” -John:13:31,32

On the cross, the “I” of humanity was glorified in Jesus, He Himself leading the way for the rest of us to follow. “If one is to be my disciple, he must pick up his cross and follow me.” Until next time, peace.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 128 other followers