Never fear, the Superego is here!


Let’s briefly review the components of our unconscious that we have explored so far and what their outer symbols are.  First we have the id, which is symbolized by the “earth, formless and void” from Genesis 1.  Second, we have the ego, which in it’s highest aspect is represented by Jesus as Authority-Ego.  Now we move on and begin exploring the superego.  Harold begins with Freud’s concept…

The concept of Authority-Ego in man, as posed by this study, is not to be confused with superego.  In regard to superego, Jesus’ words and drama invite another basic alteration in psychological concepts.  

Superego, man’s “higher nature,” or the “ego-ideal,” posed a knotty problem for Freud.  He saw “that there is a special segment of the ego that contains the ‘higher’ values, the aspirations, and also the Image‘conscience’ of the personality…and he described it as speaking to the ego with the voice of both inspiration and stern commandment.”  He saw the “closest kinship…between the id and the superego, the highest and lowest having the most in common by virtue of their relative lack of consciousness… This ‘higher nature,’ however, is nothing more than the conventional moralities that traditional religions enforce.”

But as the beginning of the quote above states, Jesus took a different tact when it comes to the superego’s role.  The big difference revolves around the role of conscience

Jesus’ teaching and drama draw a sharp distinction between conscience, or the conventional moralities that traditional religions enforce, and superego.  He indicates that the ego-group does not form the superego from the unconscious, nor is the superego the ego-group as developed along the lines of self-criticism and moral conscience – nor is it the Authority-Ego, “I.”  In Jesus’ drama, the superego is represented by the elect, the disciples.


Harold presents us with the idea of superego=disciples; the elect.  And he draws a specific distinction between superego and conscience.  What then is the role of conscience?  

Upon the disciples Jesus confers the certainty of being; and He, symbol of Authority-Ego, chooses this elect of consciousness.  But the call of conscience, represented by John the Baptist, must precede the formation of the superego-group, and conscience, like John the Baptist, also develops its own following of selves responding to the censuring voice or assuming the ascetic stance.  Conscience prepares the way for Christ-consciousness to express itself, but the elect of Authority-Ego’s choosing are not belabored by Him nor stricken by conscience to repentance.  They appear to represent an element in man’s consciousness that spontaneously responds to truth and accepts the invitation to do its work in this world.  The following of conscience and the following of truth never merge to become one fold. Thus, he whose actions are commanded by conscience is not an acting superego, not a disciple of his Authority-Ego.  Such an ego-factor is disciple of the ascetic intellect John the Baptist represented, and “the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.”  But this is not an unworthy calling, for Jesus says “Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist.”  Conscience is of the conscious domain.


So conscience is of the conscious domain, which means it is not of the kingdom of heaven, the unconscious.  But it has an important role to play; it “prepares the way of the Lord…”  We’ll finish with the role the superego, the elect/disciples, plays in the world:

Jesus’ drama indicates that superego is not drawn from the intellectual or learned level – it appears to be a lifting of simple consciousness to experience truth in action so that this consciousness may serve as a bridge between the conscious and unconscious domains, conveying to the ego-group the certainty of life and love.  Thus, Jesus says of the elect, “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.”  But He prays that they not be taken out of the world of consciousness, for here they represent “I-consciousness” in being.

And there it is.  Do you consider yourself primarily a follower of conscience or of Authority-Ego?  Something to think about!  Until next time, peace…


Recapping the Ego

Before we move on to the superego, we need to tidy up a few things about the ego…

In dealing with the concept of man’s ego, one finds many definitions of the word.  Philosophically, it is defined: The entire man considered as union of soul and body; the conscious and permanent subject of all experience.  Psychologically, the term is defined: The self, whether considered as an organization or system of mental states, or as the consciousness of the individual’s distinction from other selves.  In psychoanalysis, ego is seen as: The self-assertive and self-preserving tendency.  As regards ego, psychology speaks two commands: 1) lay down your ego, cast off your self-centeredness, you may identify yourself by becoming part of a group, by focusing your attention outside yourself – 2) build up your ego, be an entire man, fulfill yourself by knowing, being, expressing yourself, becoming an inner-directed and not an outer-directed person.

So, how do these definitions relate to the mission of Jesus?  Harold continues…

Jesus personified every aspect of ego, as the word is defined – and as it is defined, the two words, ego and life, are synonymous, so that ego must be seen as life to man.  Jesus used the word, life.  He said, simply, that man must lay down his life in order to pick it up again.  Conscious rebirth is implied, as well as rebirth into life.


Our esteemed author then goes on to tell us of the ego’s role in the unconscious.  If the ego = life, and Jesus = life, then ego = Jesus…

Freud admitted to a sort of continuation of life in the unconscious.  In it “are stored up vestiges of the existences led by countless former egos; and when the ego forms its superego out of the id, it may perhaps only be reviving images of egos that have passed away and be securing them a resurrection.” Image Freud saw this sort of immortality as a “cumulative effect in History which gradually penetrates to “those depths of the psyche far below the ego level that actually can transmit patterns of behavior whether ‘acquired’ or not.”  Jesus posed the concept that life continues in the inner realm of the unconscious.  He says, “I have other sheep, too, which do not belong to this fold…” – this fold of consciousness known to those He addressed – “My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them and they follow me; and I give them eternal life; they shall never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.”  A flock, not of the fold of consciousness, a flock to whom eternal life is given, must refer to that which is redeemed and immortal in man.  In this passage, Jesus indicates that man’s ego is not of the herd-instinct represented by the sheep.  Ego is not motivated by the impulse to belong and follow.  ImageEgo is shepherd: the sense of one being as self, and the differentiations of personality, the sheep, follow it – or, straying from this sense of certainty in being, are lost and must be found.

Man knows himself to be a flock of selves searching always to find the Self of selves to give direction to these composite lives.  Therefore, in this study the term, ego-group, will be used to designate the selves of the conscious domain and the term, Authority-Ego, will be used to designate the one governing factor of the ego-group, “I” in man which has its being in the unconscious.

I’ve never before entertained the idea or possibility that when Jesus is talking about His “sheep” He is discussing his own inner life!  Well I’ll be, huh?

As for the “resurrection…of countless former egos” and of man being “a flock of selves,” I will have much to say in the near future.  But for now we are ready to explore the superego and it’s role in our unconscious, which we will do in the next post.  Until then, peace…

I’d like to know the Id

Now we begin to move from the ego to the id and superego.  Developmentally, the id precedes the ego.  Here is a description from Wikipedia:

The id is the unorganized part of the personality structure that contains a human’s basic, instinctual drives. Id is the only component of personality that is present from birth.[3] The id is the part of the mind containing the drives present at birth; it is the source of our bodily needs, wants, desires, and impulses, particularly our sexual and aggressive drives. The id operates according to the pleasure principle, the psychic force that motivates the tendency to seek immediate gratification of any impulse.[4] The id contains the libido, which is the primary source of instinctual force that is unresponsive to the demands of reality.[5] The id acts according to the “pleasure principle“, seeking to avoid pain or unpleasure (not ‘displeasure’) aroused by increases in instinctual tension.[6] If the mind was solely guided by the id, individuals would find it difficult to wait patiently at a restaurant, while feeling hungry, and would most likely grab food off of neighbouring tables[7]

According to Freud the id is unconscious by definition:

“It is the dark, inaccessible part of our personality, what little we know of it we haveImage learned from our study of the Dreamwork and of the construction of neurotic symptoms, and most of that is of a negative character and can be described only as a contrast to the ego. We approach the id with analogies: we call it a chaos, a cauldron full of seething excitations…. It is filled with energy reaching it from the instincts, but it has no organization, produces no collective will, but only a striving to bring about the satisfaction of the instinctual needs subject to the observance of the pleasure principle.”[8]
Preston Harold says:
Psychologists agree that primary instincts start in the id, it is the older, and ego develops out of it through the influence of the outer world.  In the end, Freud came to say, “What had been id must become ‘I’…”  In the words “kingdom within,” Jesus enfolds man’s unrealized potentials; today this kingdom is called id and UNCONSCIOUS.  He presented “I” as the older or true Ego emerging from the fundamental mass of life tendencies – “Before Abraham was, I am…” and He said, “I am the way…”  Psychologists see the id, the UNCONSCIOUS, as a ‘special realm, with its own desires and modes of expression and peculiar mental mechanisms not elsewhere operative.”  Throughout His ministry, Jesus stresses this – the “kingdom within” is a special realm apart.
In other words, the id, the unconscious, is the “earth, formless and void” as testified to in Genesis 1.  It is our I AM, our God, that speaks within our ids and speaks light into our darkness.  It is our I AM that creates form out of our chaos.  This creation is happening continuously and Jesus describes His role in this process…
ImagePsychologists agree that what the personality represses and rejects belongs to the id and obeys its mechanism, but the repressed and rejected is not born of the id, it is from the province of personality.  Jesus, as Authority in the id, opens the kingdom to all who are dispirited, hopeless, maimed, rejected, repressed, and oppressed, “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden…”
ImagePsychologists agree that repressions, latent in the id, reverse themselves, and, disguised, may return to consciousness with a compulsiveness that overpowers logical thinking.  Jesus says to the heavy laden, “I will give you rest…” and “…you will find your souls refreshed.”  Thus, He indicates that repressions are transformed and strengthened in the domain He reveals.
Psychologists agree that the unconscious process in the id can be raised to a conscious level just as conscious processes can travel back into the id.  There is constant interplay between the psychic divisions.  Jesus says, “…seek, and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you.”  He speaks of “you in me” and of “I in you.”
Now that we understand a bit more about the id, it’s time to move on to the superego.  But before we do, we’ll have to backtrack a bit and make sure we understand our ego.  We’ll do that in the next post.  Until then, peace…

Authority and Power


Preston Harold continues his exploration of Jesus and the unconscious…

Psychologists presented man with the staggering fact of his unconscious mind, and that the power of this unknown reality of himself in being cannot be fully comprehended because it enfolds a world of his being that exists apart from his conscious world of being.  In Jesus’ day, the staggering fact men could not accept was His proclamation of an unknown domain within, which He called the kingdom of God, or heaven, and that this realm was real, its power real, and that it must be understood in terms of the relationship between man’s ego and “I.”

When we call ourselves “I” we usually refer to our conscious egos. Harold makes clear here that there is a difference between our conscious ego and our higher “I.”  Jesus called the conscious ego the world:

Freud assumed that what is repressed in the unconscious has acquired a certain independence of the ego, the force which denies the existence of the unconscious and has subjected it to repressions.  Jesus states that the realm He refers to and its Authority have acquired a certain independence of the conscious ego, for He says, “…I have overcome the world,” and on another occasion, “…I am not of this world” – the world of the conscious domain known to the disciples and the egocentric hierarchy of Judaism that denied Him.

Our true Ego, our “I,” our higher Self is unconscious.  Jesus made of Himself an outer symbolImage of this higher self, this authority and power within us so that we may become conscious of our true selves, who we REALLY are in the eyes of God.  Jesus wants us to turn from the outward-focused view that God is merely transcendent to the inner-focused view that God is everywhere; “The Kingdom of Heaven is spread out upon the earth but men do not see it.”

Freud came to recognize “that the unconscious does not coincide with what is repressed; it is still true that all that is repressed is Unconscious, but not…the whole Unconscious is repressed.  A part of the ego too- and Heaven knows how important a part – may be Unconscious, undoubtably is Unconscious,” and thus he came to postulate a “third Unconscious which is not repressed,” and , as Progoff says, to suspect it “to be the most important unconscious of all, the very foundation of psychic life.”  This very foundation of psychic life, Jesus called the “Son of man”- man’s true Ego, “I,” his true Authority in life, or Self – and acting as its symbol confronted man with the fact of his inner kingdom, with the fact of its power…

The Gospel of St. John presents the concept that Jesus symbolized the psychological potentiality each individual can realize within himself as he comes to accept for himself the name by which Jesus called Himself, Son of man, “I.”


The question for us is can we come to accept for ourselves the same name by which Jesus called himself.  Nobody can answer that question for you but you yourself.

We’ve been looking a good bit into the ego these past couple of posts, but what about the id and superego, those other two aspects of the Freudian psychology of the unconscious?  We’ll begin swimming towards them in the next installment.  Until then, peace…

The Unconscious Beckons…

As we begin to explore what Preston Harold has to say about the unconscious, I think it would be a good idea to quote him at length.  This will get us started on the right foot…

Because today’s psychological concepts and terminology are both confused and confusing, and because Jesus symbolized and dramatized the psychological makeup of man, a brief outline of the parallel between psychology and Jesus’ teaching cannot be traced with ease and desirable clarity.  But as Lancelot Law Whyte, author of “The Unconscious Before Freud,” says of his work:

“However inadequate the present study, the attempt is necessary… For today faith, if it bears any relation to the natural world, implies faith in the unconscious.  If there is a God, he must speak there; if there is a healing power, it must operate there; if there is a principle of ordering in the organic realm, it’s most powerful manifestation must be found there.”


What is the Biblical definition of “a principle of ordering in the organic realm?” Why, it’s GENESIS.  According to Whyte, the most powerful manifestation of GENESIS is found in our unconscious.  Harold continues…

Jesus conveyed that the psyche of man is divided: in the Book of Hebrews the author speaks of the Logos penetrating “to the very division of soul and spirit, joints and marrow – scrutinizing the very thoughts and concepts of the heart.  And no created thing is hidden from him; all things lie open and exposed before the eyes of him with whom we have to reckon.” (Heb. 4:12-13)  ImageThe origin of the unconscious is unknown, but it was incipient in Jesus’ day.  Whyte writes: “…in a tentative and speculative manner many thinkers in different cultures had already divided the mind into two or three higher and lower parts; the Egyptians, the Hebrews, and Hindus…”

The concept offered by this study is that Jesus identified Himself with the mission of enlightening man by revealing to him his own unconscious mind, that He saw this task as a mission of redemption, that He introduced the principles of functional psychic operations, and both symbolized and demonstrated the Authority and power in the unconscious versus the conscious in man.  

We will have much more to say concerning the divided psyche of man soon.  In the meantime, the next post will look at the “Authority and power” that Jesus demonstrated in the unconscious.  Until then, peace…

The Name of God

ImagePicking back up where we left off in Chapter 2, Harold tells us that “Jesus speaks not of himself as person, but of living truth, Father of being, to be identified by the same word in all mankind.  He says:

“If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.  My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.  He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me… the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.  For I have not spoken of myself…” (John 5:31, 7:16, 8:14, 12:44-48)

Harold asks:

And what is the WORD, the SAME?  On another occasion Jesus has said, “…have you not read what was said to you by God, I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob?”  [Ethelbert] Stauffer writes, “God says to Abraham: ‘Seekest thou the God of Gods?… I am He.  …I am before the days were’….”  and in another passage he speaks of the emphatic “I’s” that appear in ancient Hebrew literature: “I and not an angel; I and not a seraph; I and not the envoy; I, the Lord, I am he and no other.”  The WORD, the SAME, the NAME of God appears to be “I.”

A particularly helpful way to understand this concept is to put the words “the” and “is” on either side of all “I AM” statements in the Bible.  For example, the above quotes would then read:

The I AM is the God of Abraham…  The I AM is he… The I AM is before the days were. 

Transferring this concept to the sayings of Jesus would result in:

The I AM is the way, the truth, and the life…  The I AM is the gate…  Before Abraham was, the I AM is… etc…


Harold continues…

“I” appears to be the name of God declared to men by Jesus, proclaimed again just before He goes out out the Garden of Gethsemane, that men might know themselves to be “I.” (John 12:28, 14:6-10, 17:26) But as one tries to explain that only through “I-being” in man can man reach the truth of his and all other men’s being, he becomes object or pretender to diety, all of whom speak in terms of “I,” for they can speak the truth in no other terms as they try to share it with their fellowmen.  Lord Krishna says:

There is no past when I was not,

Nor you, nor these; and we

Shall – none and never – cease to live

Throughout the long to-be.

At this point I am reminded of the Book of Revelation.  In chapters 2 and 19 references are made to a name given by the Son of Man and to the name of the Son of Man himself…

“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who conquers I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, with a new name written on the stone that no one knows except the one who receives it.” 2:17

His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems; and he has a name inscribed that no one knows but himself. 19:12

And what is the name that only the one who has it knows?  What is the name only the personImage who has it can call him or herself?  It’s “I!”  I cannot call you, the reader, “I.”  I don’t know you as “I.” I cannot call anyone else in the entire world “I,” except I myself.  “I” is the eternal subjective, infinite, self-referential name – the name of GOD.

Our author concludes the subject of God’s name:

The name of God in man, “I,” is deeply buried in the human “tell.”  Jesus sought to clarify the concept, but to begin to understand His revelation one must observe that His words describing the inner kingdom parallel psychology’s description of the UNCONSCIOUS, although they also reach beyond psychology’s present concepts.

In my next post we’ll dive in and begin to explore the unconscious in the human being.  Yes, we’ll be swimming in some deep waters!  See you at the pool!  Until then, peace…

The Husbands of the Woman at the Well

We’ll finish up looking at our subject of Kundalini and it’s activating the chakras by interpreting the process in light of the well known story of Jesus meeting the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s Well in chapter 4 of John’s gospel.  Beyond the immediate theological meanings elucidated in Biblical commentaries, beyond the breaking of strict Middle-East social and cultural barriers, beyond Jesus knowing everything about this woman’s previous life (all of these understandings are relevant, by the way), there is a deeper meaning to be gleaned from this Gospel encounter…


In her work “What We Can Learn from the East,” Beatrice Bruteau looks at Jesus and the gospels in light of eastern religious traditions.  What if these traditions are seen as the “Old Testament” for Eastern peoples.  Instead of having to leave society to go and meditate and live the ascetic life apart (pretty much really the only way to become enlightened, and enlightenment IS salvation in the east), Jesus comes and opens the way to all peoples, even… even… (gasp… wait for it!) Samaritan women! (whom to a Jew would be seen as akin to a Hindu untouchable).

Bruteau begins:

Of course, we all develop through stages.  One way of describing one lineup of stages is by means of the CHAKRAS, the “wheels” or “centers of consciousness” through which the energy of manifestation in the finite order ascends to reunion with the Infinite of which it is, so to speak, the “flip side.”  The energy, in the Hindu tradition is called SHAKTI and the infinite is called SHIVA.  The union is spoken of as a marriage… The centers of consciousness can be identified as security, pleasure, power, love, creativity, insight, and divine union.

Bruteau goes on to interpret the story calling it “The Seven Husbands of the Samaritan Woman.”  6a00e5537c83be883401053631858d970c-320wiShe places the conversation of the woman with Jesus in a Zen context as a DHARMA combat, which is what Zen practitioners who want deeper experiences of enlightenment seek from more advanced practitioners.  The “husbands” become the chakras of the Hindu tradition.

When the meeting begins, Jesus addresses the woman first, meaning that he acknowledges that she has something to offer him.  “Give me a drink” (John 4:7).  But Jesus also has something to offer.  A few verses later: “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is that is saying to you, ‘Give me a drink,’ you would have asked him and he would have given you living water” (4:10).  But Jesus doesn’t have an instrument for drawing from Jacob’s Well.  Does he have something even better to give?  Bruteau continues…

I interpret the Well – Jacob’s Well – as the traditions of the people, the revelation by which both the Jews and the Samaritans have been living.  She understands him immediately as claiming that this revered and revelatory tradition is to be superceded.  This is a very daring thought (do we dare to think that way about OUR sacred tradition?)…  He is ready for this question because he knows the source of the Well itself.  The Well of tradition does not satisfy; it provokes continuing thirst (which is not a bad thing). But the water he is speaking of comes from an interior well; it becomes in one “a fountain of water springing up to eternal life” (4:14). Therefore, mediating instruments for reaching the water are unnecessary: the water comes of its own accord.  The source of life is not outside or separate from the living one.  The question of replenishment does not arise; the life is eternal.

Jesus has now prepared the woman for the next step of the teaching.  From out of nowhere, a complete non-sequitur, he says, “Go call your husband and come.”  In other words, Jesus is asking her “What are you currently wedded to? What are you joining yourself to?”  The woman answers “I have no husband.”  In other words, she is not wedded to anything at the moment; she is free from attachements (except her unfulfilled thirst!).  “Ah!” says Jesus.  “This is correct! You have tried and then discarded 5 previous life-mates.  You are currently involved with a sixth, but you realize this isn’t your true husband either.  How do I know this?  Well, this is the seventh time you’ve come to this well looking for fulfillment.  But this well of tradition can only take you so far.  Strange that you’ve come here with a seventh husband in mind and found me, isn’t it?”

Let’s look at these six other “husbands” that the Samaritan woman has found to be necessary but ultimately unfulfilling.  When the questing soul realizes a “husband” is insufficient, it divorces itself from that life goal and joins itself to another, somewhat broader and less ego-centered goal.  Bruteau explains:

The first husband (Root Chakra/Seal) represents a life-style sometimes spoken of as “living to eat.” The dimensions of life are simple direct pleasures and comforts; the “good life.”

The second husband refers to sexual energy… For most people this will be raising a family and feeling pride and satisfaction in continuing one’s tribe, in reproducing and externalizing and multiplying oneself.

The third husband is more ambitious, symbolizing a position and activity of power, a larger scope for one’s creativity.  This can take the form of a career… a feeling of dominating some kind of world, even if a relatively small one.  The satisfaction here is not in the body or emotions but more in the mind.

The crossing from the third to fourth husband is made when the third husband’s energy is turned away from purely self-seeking and begins to be engaged in unselfish love for others.  After the relationship with the fourth husband begins, the ensuing relationships don’t exactly prove unsatisfactory (as the former did), but what they represent expand into the next marriage.  Perhaps one is “widowed” from these levels and tenderly handed on to the next.  tumblr_mgrzzaomc31rvt4izo1_1280

The fourth marriage is more serious, and the soul gives itself to it more consciously and more thoroughly.  Appreciation of the PERSON as such appears and grows, concern for the other self in the other’s own terms, instead of in terms of how the other can be pleasing or useful to me.

The fifth husband means creativity with a transcendent, sacred aura.  It includes whatever can be experienced as a creative art of high and pure aspiration… Deep living with the fifth husband produces profound satisfactions that are not of this world and enlarges the capacityo f the soul for still greater experience, leading to a holy frustration with the limitations of the externalized, or material world.  Thus, one is drawn more and more inward, toward the source of beauty and inspiration and revelation within.

The sixth lover – who is still not the true husband – is some version of the contemplative life, in the mind/heart alone, in intellectual intuitions and realizations difficult to express.  The old ego-centered self has been dissolving ever since the fourth marriage… At the sixth chakra it has worn away, except for it’s drive to find the Totally Real… (The woman) knows quite clearly that she seeks the Absolute… No RELATIVE being, goodness, truth, or happiness will answer.  Thus she knows it has to be sought within herself; all external things are certainly relative… Our Samaritan woman, therefore, is a questing soul that is READY to pass from the sixth lover to the seventh and true husband.

Wedding the seventh husband is the transcending of any and all culture and tradition.  Jesus says true worshipers will not hold to traditions of worship, neither on the Samaritan mountain or in the Jewish  temple.  True worship happens on the inside “in spirit and in truth.”

Now for the final dharma confrontation.  Bruteau finishes…

Woman_at_the_wellThe woman then throws her final challenge to him – for her, a direct assault on the summit: “How about the ‘Messiah,’ that is, the final revelation of everything?”  And the ultimate revelation, the passage from even the highest intuition to actual BEING IN SPIRIT AND TRUTH comes: “I AM, the [one] speaking to you” (4:26).  This is, at long last, the seventh husband; the man and the woman are united at this point.  His I AM is not different than her I AM.  What has been speaking to her all along has been her own I AM – “I am my beloved’s and my beloved is mine” (Song of Solomon 6:3) – the one divine I AM, the Spirit and the Truth.  She/he has been”raised up” on the last day, the seventh day, the sabbath day of completion and consummation, in which “all things are shown” (4:25), “everything [the soul] ever did” (4:29), the recapitulation of everything cosmic and psychic in the “ascension to where he/she was before” John 6:62).

Hopefully this take on the story of Jesus meeting the woman at the well gives you a taste of the depth and wisdom that can be found in sacred scriptures when read beyond our usual understanding.  We can see that a deeper meaning is there hidden in plain site for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.  Whatever religious tradition you may come from, remember that it is there to feed your thirst for the source and nothing more.  The tradition cannot quench your thirst, but hopefully you will let it lead you to it’s source, which is the only thing that can.

In my next post we’ll jump back to where we left off in “The Shining Stranger.”  Until then, peace…