What I believe
I just thought that it might be a good idea to include a page on what I believe about the ultimate nature of reality and the meaning of life so that visitors could understand why I have put the words I have into my goddess, Sophia's mouth. Thinking about it for just a brief moment, I realize that I believe that there are many possibly correct answers to these questions. Nevertheless, I've decided to give you one version, what I think are some likely and satisfying possibilities.
I believe in a multileveled reality.
The most fundamental layer of reality is what I will call, the Eternal, and consists of something ineffable, but might best be described as pure consciousness. This has been variously dubbed as, the Infinite, Cosmic or Universal Consciousness, the Tao or uncarved block, Ein Sof, Deity, God(dess), Creator etc., etc., etc. Of course as it says in Laotze's Dao De Jing, "The name, which can be named, is not the true name."
My belief in the eternal plane of existence and the universal consciousness that dwells there, which I am going to call Goddess, is based on the fact that it is recognized by every mystical sect of every religion. The name which is given to it by the different systems is of course different, and the symbolic language used to describe it varies a bit, but if one studies the teachings of the mystics, one, I believe, will come to the conclusion that they are all describing the same experience. In fact, it almost meets the scientific criteria of being an intersubjectively verified phenomenon. Of course, one must be an adept at the spiritual practices of the mystics to be able to have the experience and there is the rub for scientists, I suppose.
I personally have not had an experience of enlightenment, nor am I inclined towards meditation, but I am willing to accept the truth of the mystic experience as an article of faith.
I guess, my belief is based on my spiritual quest. On that spiritual quest I've investigated all the world's great religions and philosophies. I never found one that completely satisfied me. Every religion has a different God and different teachings on life after death. I finally came to the conclusion that it was naive to think that any one was absolutely true. It made more sense to me to think that they were all vain attempts by humans to understand things they couldn't really understand. But that doesn't mean they are complete nonsense. I thought perhaps there was some truth in all of them, so I started looking for similar teachings among them. Finally, I came to the conclusion that among the mystical sects of the various religions there was more commonality of view than among the mainstream sects.
Now, even among the mystical sects there are apparently great differences. Some of these differences I have come to believe are caused by the difficulty of putting an experience of the absolute and eternal into relative and temporal terms. It can only be done through allegory, which uses symbols. The choice of symbols is arbitrary and it may make it appear that the mystics of different religions are talking about different things when they are actually speaking of the same thing. For example, the conscious being which is experienced in the enlightened state will usually be referred to by the name of the God of the greater religious system to which the mystic belongs. For example, a Hindu will call it Brahma, whereas a Christian will call it Christ, but that does not mean it was a different experience.
The mystical experience, as opposed to occult experience, is not one of a God speaking to the mystic, but rather one of the experience of a light, a presence which fills the mystic with a feeling of bliss, peace, and oneness with the creator and all creation (or the ground of being and all being, if you prefer).
Another layer of reality, sometimes called the real world, but I believe less real because it is temporal rather than eternal, I will call here the created world, and it is what we sometimes refer to as this world, or the real world, the material world, Nature, etc., etc.
My belief in this plane of existence hardly needs justification, it is the world of our daily experience. I believe that science is the best way to obtain knowledge of this level of existence and that someday almost every natural phenomenon will be scientifically explained . The one thing I doubt will ever be scientifically explained is consciousness, that is, unless consciousness is someday taken as a fundamental force itself, and I believe that consciousness has powers which also may have no scientific explanation.
I believe that it is possible that (an)other level(s) exist(s). The most likely of these, is what I will call here the spiritual world, and is variously dubbed, the astral plane, the psychic plane, the supernatural, etc.
This is the level of existence that I find most troubling, and I find myself wavering between belief and disbelief in it. I hear so many stories of people having experiences with spiritual beings that I find it hard to believe that they are all nonsense. However, I am pretty sure that many of them are mistaken impressions, hallucinations, or just outright lies. Perhaps they all are, I don't know.
Anyway, I am open minded on the subject, but I feel that the supernatural world, even if it exists, is not the proper concern of us mortals. First of all, I can't see -- though I may be blind -- that it has much influence on our lives. Secondly, I believe it is another Pandora's box; open it and who knows what might fly out. It could be dangerous to your mental , and/or spiritual health!
I would kind of like to believe in the spiritual world because it offers the possibility of my having a soul, an everlasting individual consciousness. It also offers the possibility of better worlds than this in which my soul, and others might live, without which I'm not sure I would want an eternal soul. So, I guess I would say that I hope for these things, but I am still doubtful of their existence.
When I said that I don't think the supernatural world is the proper concern of human beings, I didn't mean that it was not a question worth considering. What I meant is that I oppose occultism. I'm not saying that I despise or would persecute those who are interested in exploring that area, but I strongly discourage it.
I am in favor of leaving the fate of my soul in the "hands" the eternal Goddess, and focusing on doing good in this world.
Now, I know that the term god or goddess is
usually associated with a personal deity, something more akin to a supernatural
being than a universal consciousness.
The question arises of whether the eternal is a personal
being or not. My answer to that question is that, if indeed this being
is infinite and eternal, then it transcends the duality of the created
world. I suppose we could say that it is both personal and impersonal,
or perhaps more accurately, neither personal nor impersonal. This is what
I meant when I said, thinking or speaking of the eternal realm would involve
paradox.
Let me say at this point that I don't believe in a personal relationship with the Goddess. I'm not saying that I think it is impossible, just that I strongly doubt it is a good idea to believe that some inner voice is the infallible voice of God. It seems that many people believe they have a personal relationship with God; they may even say they talk with God. No problem with talking to God, I suppose, as long as it's a one way thing. What I do know is that these folks who talk to God don't all believe the same thing. Now, I don't think God is going around telling different things to different folks, so I think that it only makes sense to believe that most, if not all, of these people are mistaken in thinking they have a personal relationship with God. They are deifying their own opinions, which is dangerous, so I discourage this idea of a personal relationship with God.
Another belief I would like to present here has to do with religion. The word religion comes from the Latin root ligare: to attach. So it means to reconnect with the God(dess) or the ground of being, what have you. It is similar to the Indian word Yoga which is related to the English word yoke.
In Vedanta it is taught that there are different paths, different yogas, appropriate to different people according to their temperament.
For intellectual folks like me, there is Jnana yoga, which is something like speculative philosophy. One can approach God(dess) from an intellectual understanding of her.
For more emotional types there is Bhakti yoga, the yoga of devotion. In this a devotee approaches God(dess) through worship of an image or an avatar.
For workaholics, there is Karma yoga, the yoga of good works.
Finally, there is Raja yoga, the royal yoga, which is union with God(des) through spiritual practices, mysticism. This is called the royal road, I believe, because it is considered only appropriate for those of noble character, not something to be dabbled in.
When I first learned of this system of four yogas, I had to laugh about the great debate between Catholic and Protestant Christianity on justification through works vs. justification by faith. It seems that there is room for both in Vedanta.
How do we relate to Goddess? Besides the above mentioned ways of communing with Goddess, there are others: Whenever we appreciate something good or beautiful, whenever we communicate with others in an honest and caring manner, whenever we do a good deed, whenever we just sit back in awe of the mystery and magnificence of this universe, whenever we do these and so many more things, we are communing with the divine.