Interesting account found in Google Books on the subject of Alvin Boyd Kuhn, experienced by one who attended seminary
Many know of Dr. Alvin Boyd Kuhn as a theosophical scholar and author. Here is one letter we received January 3, 1985:
"Dear Sir: Would you kindly place my name on your mailing list to receive your catalogue. It will be appreciated.
"A friend purchased a book he secured for me by Dr. Alvin Boyd Kuhn, THE RED SEA (IS YOUR BLOOD). When I was in seminary, my Higher Bible Criticism and Textual Analysis Professor used Dr. Kuhn's books as the leading exponent, next to G. R. S. Mead's books, as the most praiseworthy and very reliable, as they fall in place with other subjects and core subjects I had to take at seminary. My biggest surprise when at seminary was the double standard, one for the churchgoers who must have the exoteric and those who went to seminary have the occult, esoteric teachings; and when we were pledged to the subdiaconate up to the ministry for ordination to keep this all under our hallowed hats when we went out into the world and 'preached' the gospel (???). One for Christianity (esoteric/occult) and one for churchianity (exoteric). Thank you."
Toward An International Language (with commentary by Alvin Boyd Kuhn)
The Red Sea (Reed Sea) Is Your Blood by AB Kuhn
The Red Sea Is Your Blood by Alvin Boyd Kuhn
*Typed and edited by Juan Schoch for educational research purposes from New Outlook, circa 1953. This notice is not to be removed.
The ancient sages who indicted the revered “Holy Scriptures” of antiquity wrote little in the spirit of what we call history but wrote almost entirely in the literary method known as the allegorical. Their concern in the field of religious writing was not to record objective historical events, but rather to dramatize aspects of man’s mystical experience by means of well and profoundly conceived pictorial representations, such as myths, allegories, dramas, number graphs and, to a surprising degree, astrological designs around the stellar constellations.
The characters in these structures took the part and enacted the role of the several elements in the actual drama of the linked divine-human entity who is man himself. It is, therefore, a gross mistake to assume, as Western scholarship has always done, that the ancients were simple-minded children who naively interpreted nature and human life in the terms of their omnipresent mythologies; conceived and believed by them as actual descriptions of real events. Better understanding is now coming to see the ancient myths as extremely ingenious and subtly-shrewd dramatic portrayals of the deepest verities of the human experience on its religio-mystical side.
When it is seen also that the bulk of the literature in our Jewish-Christian Bible is a collection of such allegorical material, the matter becomes of considerable moment for all Western civilization and culture. St. Paul, for instance, in the fourth chapter of Galatians, directly states that the story of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Isaac, and Ishmael in the Old Testament “is an allegory.” In the same chapter he declares Hagar to be “Mount Sinai which is in Arabia, the seal of our bondage.” Also in Revelation 11:8 the text recites that “Our Lord” was crucified in a city “allegorically (New translation) called Sodom and Egypt.” How “Our Lord” could be crucified in two places some 500 or more miles apart, has therefore to be “allegorically” interpreted since it cannot be done historically.
Of the most startling significance in instances in which the historical must yield to the allegorical, is the item of obvious symbolical and not historical reference known as the crossing of the Red Sea by the Israelites. Interest here is at once stunningly aroused by the prime fact that this Red Sea is no longer to be found in the Bible. Scholarship has at long last corrected a most glaring error and taken the name out of the text of Scripture. It is, however, only a matter of taking out what never was really in. The English name, Red Sea, had stood in the text, but the connotation which this name carried to Western readers was never in. For the words of the Hebrew manuscripts which had been translated “Red Sea” never actually meant the geographical body of water between Egypt and Arabia on the map. The name is now translated properly (in the Moffatt translation) as the “Reed Sea.”
Incontestable evidence of the correctness of this translation is found in any Hebrew dictionary. The words in the Hebrew manuscript texts are IAM SUPH. IAM means “sea, ocean water.” Does SUPH mean “red?” On the contrary decidedly green; for it is given as meaning “sedge, reeds, marsh grass, swamp grass.” In shocked surprise the general reader will ask how any translator could find a reason for translating SUPH “red.” The exposition should open all eyes to the methods of subtle indirection and poetic symbolism in which ancient scriptures were written, and spiritual states represented.
As said, the ancient sages wrote in a language of nature symbolism and pictorial depiction. Always they looked outside to find in nature a situation that would furnish an analogue of an inner mystical realization or spiritual law of the higher life of man. Having in mind right from the start that the body of water which the immortal soul of a human had to cross in its transition from the beginning to the end of its human pilgrimage was the blood of the human body itself, which is seven-eighths water and one-eighth earth, these poetically-minded writers found the exact parallel to the human body out in nature in a swamp, marsh, or meadow, where water and earth are interblended. And in such a place reeds grow! Purely on natural analogy, poetically viewed, the body was typified as the “Reed Sea.” But obviously the early translators understood that the reference was to the human body-blood, and that being red in color, they felt privileged to translate IAM SUPH as the “Red Sea.”
Doubtless to many readers this interpretation will seem at first glance to be far-fetched and fanciful, even far too flimsy for serious acceptance. So it is desirable to buttress its legitimacy by citing additional material from the Scriptures that link immediately in with the rendition.
Both in Revelation and elsewhere, reference is made to a divine fire – invariably the symbol of spirit-soul power – which is to descend from above and enter into “the ocean which is on the border of the earth and turn the sea into blood.” Here, says the interpreter, the allegorical method fails utterly, since the oceans are salt water and not blood. But hold! It is precisely the reverse; for the interpretation fails historically,– since the actual oceans are not blood – and is found, most remarkably, to be true allegorically! Not, to be sure, in the earth’s oceans has the sea been turned into blood but in another place – and the very place where all Biblical meaning truly heads up – the sea water has been turned into blood: in the veins and arteries of the human body.
For the biological stream of evolving organic life began in the sea salt water and now in man, the highest product of that evolution, that sea water has been turned into blood. Modern chemistry finds the mineral count out of blood similar to that of sea water. And salt water was administered for transfusion before blood itself was resorted to.
It is now known that the ancient Egyptians called the primal “waters of the firmament,” or the primordial sea of matter, “the lake of Sa.” This was the virginal source of the essence of matter. Out of this “womb of all things” issued organic forms of life in the progressive line of development. As all life on our globe simularly issued forth out of sea water, the latter became the universal symbol for virgin matter. As matter and water were thus the eternal mothers of all life, the goddesses of the mythologies were nearly all named after the sea, as Thallath (Gk: sea), Meri (Egyptian), Mary (Latin: Mare, the sea), and others.
But the etymology yields astonishing correlations. Our “sea” must be this s(e)a itself. From sa comes undoubtedly sa-lt also. As salt is a preservative, then comes sa-ve, sal-vation, sal-ve, sal-iva, sal-utary, sal-ubrious, sa-cred, sa-nctity, and so on. And by what does scripture tell us we are to be saved? By the blood! By the atoning blood! By the primal s(e)a water, transmuted into blood, blood charged by the growing power of the indwelling “Lamb of God,” or Christ nature in man, with spiritual dynamic and changed verily into the blood of divine life for man. Saved by the blood of the Lamb! And Lot’s wife, who looked back and therefore reverted to primal constituency, was turned into a pillar of salt!
Speculation can not overlook also the name of Sodom in immediate connection with this elucidation. With salt reading in chemistry NACL, and the NA meaning sodium, it seems obvious that Sodom is related to sodium. The great battle narrated in the Genesis chapter 14, in immediate connection with the Abraham-Lot “history” was fought in the “salt sea,” in the valley of Siddim, (that is, the salt sea).” And even Siddim is but one vowel removed from “Sodom.”
Do we face at last the truth, lost for ages, that this great battle is being fought, not in a salt marsh in some indeterminate ancient country, but verily in the human blood?
The human blood is the “salt sea;” your blood is the “Red sea”!
NSA Snowden Releases Tally Update - *6,193 Pages
September 29, 2015
28 September 2015. Add 21 pages to The Intercept. Tally now *6,193 pages of The Guardian first reported 58,000 files; caveat: Janine Gibson, The Guardian NY, said on 30 January 2014 "much more than 58,000 files in first part, two more parts" (no numbers) (tally about ~10.6%). DoD claims 1,700,000 files (~.04% of that released). ACLU lists 525 pages released by the press. However, if as The Washington Post reported, a minimum of 250,000 pages are in the Snowden files, then less than 1% have been released. Note Greenwald claim on 13 September 2014 of having "hundreds of thousands" of documents. At Snowden current rate it will take 20-620 years to free all documents.
24 September 2015. Add 283 pages to The Intercept.
15 August 2015. Add 74 pages to New York Times-Propublica.
11 August 2015. Add 29 pages to The Intercept.
3 August 2015. Add 10 pages to The Intercept.
16 July 2015. Add 8 pages to The Intercept.
1 July 2015. Add 1,240 pages to The Intercept.
26 June 2015. Add 13 pages to The Intercept.
22 June 2015. Add 250 pages to The Intercept.
13 June 2015. Italian journalist provides correspondence with USG on Snowden documents:
2015-1504.pdf offsite Stefania Maurizi-NSA Snowden Correspondence June 13, 2015 2015-1503.pdf offsite Stefania Maurizi-DoJ Snowden Correspondence June 13, 2015 2015-1502.pdf offsite Stefania Maurizi-State Snowden Correspondence June 13, 2015
12 June 2015. Paul and FVEYDOCS tweet:
IC off the Record:
12 June 2015. Aeris tweets:
12 June 2015. Christopher Parsons writes:
Saw your tweet re: sources for Snowden docs. I've compiled all the relevant Canadian documents, along with summary information of the documents'contents along with indexing information, here:
In the coming months I'm hoping to have equivalent summaries for Australia and New Zealand (and will then be moving on to do similar summary work for US- and UK-based documents).
12 June 2015. Snowden documents compilations (plus this one):
If all documents are free somewhere please send pointer to: cryptome[at]earthlink.net
12 June 2015. Add 4 pages to The Intercept.
4 June 2015. Add 91 pages to The New York Times.
28 May 2015. Add 23 pages to The Intercept.
22 May 2015. Add 26 pages to CBC (with The Intercept).
21 May 2015. Edward Snowden was quoted in Forbes on May 10, 2015:
"What I did was that I worked in partnership with the journalists who received the material. As a condition of receiving the material they agreed, prior to publication, to run these stories by the government. Not for the government to censor them, but for the government to be able to look at these and go “look, this isn’t going to get anybody killed, this isn’t going to put a human agent behind enemy lines at risk” or something like that. “This isn’t going to make Al Qaeda be able to bomb buildings.” And I think the value of this model has been proven to be quite effective."
This indicates all stories about document releases have been "run-by governments prior to publication." Cryptome has filed an FOIA request to NSA for records of these "run-bys."
21 May 2015. Add 10 pages to The Intercept.
19 May 2015. Add 19 pages to The Intercept.
18 May 2015. Add 6 pages to The Intercept.
8 May 2015. Add 40 pages to The Intercept.
5 May 2015. Add 46 pages to The Intercept.
2 April 2015. Add 7 pages to The Intercept.
30 March 2015. Snowden documents archive by The Courage Foundation:
24 March 2015. Add 152 pages to CBC News.
14 March 2015. Add 2 pages to New Zealand Herald.
10 March 2015. Add 12 pages to The Intercept. Add 8 pages to New Zealand Herald.
8 March 2015. Add 35 pages to New Zealand Star Times.
6 March 2015. Add 4 pages to New Zealand Herald.
5 March 2015. Snowden Archive, searchable: http://cjfe.org/snowden
5 March 2015. Add 6 pages to New Zealand Herald.
19 February 2015. Add 32 pages to The Intercept.
10 February 2015. Add 2 pages to The Intercept.
5 February 2015. Add 3 pages to The Intercept.
4 February 2015. Add 5 pages to The Intercept.
30 January 2015. Compilation of Snowden documents:
[Repost] 4 April 2014. ACLU offers NSA documents search: https://www.aclu.org/nsa-documents-search
If more lists please send: cryptome[at]earthlink.net
28 January 2015. Add 21 pages to CBC News.
26 January 2015. Add Citizenfour Snowden Documentary High-Definition, with innumerable images, by Cryptome.
25 January 2015. Add Citizenfour Snowden Documentary by Cryptome, with innumerable images, some 87 extracted by Paul Dietrich in following entry.
22 January 2015. Add 87 pages to Paul Dietrich (via Citizenfour).
17 January 2015. Add 199 pages to Der Spiegel.
28 December 2014. Add 666 pages to Der Spiegel.
22 December 2014. Add 1 page to New York Times.
13 December 2014. Add 67 pages to The Intercept.
4 December 2014. Add 63 pages to The Intercept.
25 November 2014. Add 72 pages to Süddeutsche Zeitung.
6 November 2014. At current rate of release it will take 31 to 908 years for full disclosure.
10 October 2014. Add 69 pages to The Intercept.
17 September 2014. Add 2 pages to The Intercept.
14 September 2014. Add 68 pages to Der Spiegel.
13 September 2014. In video Glenn Greenwald claims to have "hundreds of thousands" of documents (at 9:06 min)
Audio excerpt: http://youtu.be/xnfIp38AAhM
5 September 2014. Add 32 pages to The Intercept.
31 August 2014. Add 34 pages to Der Spiegel.
25 August 2014. Add 55 pages to The Intercept.
16 August 2014. Add 26 pages to Heise.
12 August 2014. Add 6 pages to The Intercept.
5 August 2014. Add 12 pages to The Intercept.
4 August 2014. Add 23 pages to The Intercept.
25 July 2014. Add 4 pages to The Intercept.
14 July 2014. Add 8 pages to The Intercept.
14 July 2014. "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!"
Cryptome has sent a demand for accounting and public release specifics to holders of the Snowden documents: New York Times, Washington Post, The Guardian, Barton Gellman, Laura Poitrias, Glenn Greenwald, ACLU, EFF and John and Jane Does, US Citizens:
11 July 2014. See related essay, Open the Snowden Files, Krystian Woznicki, 11July 2014:
We did not have an official NSA list of targets. We had to find them in the pile ourselves. Soltani, an independent researcher, did most of the heavy lifting on that. Because the information was not laid out in rows and columns, the way it might be in a spreadsheet, Soltani wrote computer code to extract what we were looking for from something like a quarter-million pages of unstructured text.
If a minimum of 250,000 pages are in the Snowden files, then less than 1% have been released.
9 July 2014. Add 8 pages to The Intercept.
9 July 2014. Add 1 page to Washington Post.
23 June 2014. Add 9 pages to Der Spiegel.
22 June 2014. Add 41 pages to Information-The Intercept.
Revised. This is included in entry above. 18 June 2014. Add 20 pages to The Intercept.
18 June 2014. Add 200 pages to Der Spiegel.
16 June 2014. Add 4 pages to Der Spiegel.
1 June 2014. Add 4 pages to New York Times.
23 May 2014. Cryptome placed online No Place to Hide, 310 pages, to compensate for failure to release Snowden documents:
19 May 2014. The Intercept released 12 pages.
13 May 2014. Glenn Greenwald released 107 pages, some new, some previously published, some full pages, some page fragments.
5 May 2014. Related tally of redactions of Snowden releases:
30 April 2014. Add 19 pages to The Intercept.
30 April 2014. Add 2 pages to Dagbladet belatedly.
5 April 2014. Add 21 pages to The Intercept.
4 April 2014. ACLU offers NSA documents search: https://www.aclu.org/nsa-documents-search
If more lists please send: cryptome[at]earthlink.net
2 April 2014.
29 March 2014. Add 1 page to Der Spiegel.
22 March 2014. Add 3 pages to Der Spiegel.
22 March 2014. Add 2 pages to New York Times.
21 March 2014. Add 7 pages to Le Monde.
20 March 2014. Add 6 pages to The Intercept.
18 March 2014. Add 4 pages to Washington Post.
13 March 2014. Add 1 page to The Intercept.
12 March 2014. Add 35 pages to The Intercept.
12 March 2014. Add 62 pages to New York Times. Add 2 pages to NRC Handelsblad.
7 March 2014. Add 8 pages to The Intercept.
27 February 2014. Add 3 pages to Guardian.
25 February 2014. Add 11 pages to NBC News.
24 February 2014. Add 4 pages to The Intercept.
24 February 2014. Add *50 pages to The Intercept (7 pages are duplicates of GCHQ Psychology).
18 February 2014. Add *45 pages to The Intercept (37 pages are duplicates of release by NBC News).
Note: Between 10-17 February 2014, The Intercept disclosed fragments of Snowden pages and the New York Times referenced some but as far as known did not release them in full. If available please send link.
10 February 2014. Add 1 page to NRC Handelsblad (via Electrospaces.blogspot.com).
7 February 2014. Add 15 pages NBC News.
5 February 2014. Add 14 pages NBC News.
31 January 2014. Add 27 pages to CBC News.
27 January 2014. Add 47 pages to NBC News.
27 January 2014. Add 18 pages to Anonymous via New York Times.
16 January 2014. Add 8 pages to The Guardian.
* 14 January 2014. Add 21 pages to Information.dk (duplicate).
* 13 January 2014. Add 4 pages to Information.dk (duplicate).
Related Snowden Document and Page Count Assessment:
* 5 January 2014. Add 16 pages to Der Spiegel (30 December 2013. No source given for NSA docs). Tally now *962 pages (~1.7%) of reported 58,000. NSA head claims 200,000 (~.50% of that released).
4 January 2014. The source was not identified for *133 pages published by Der Spiegel and Jacob Appelbaum in late December 2013. They are included here but have not been confirmed as provided by Edward Snowden. Thanks to post by Techdirt.
Glenn Greenwald tweeted:
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald, 8:05 AM - 29 Dec 13
@Cryptomeorg @ioerror I had no involvement in that Spiegel article, ask them - and they don't say those are Snowden docs.
Matt Blaze tweeted, 11:24 AM - 2 Jan 14
matt blaze @mattblaze
If there are other sources besides Snowden, I hope journalists getting docs are careful to authenticate them (& disclose uncertainty).
3 January 2014. Add 13 pages to Washington Post.
3 January 2014. See also EFF, ACLU and LeakSource accounts:
2 January 2014. Add 1 page to Washington Post published 10 July 2013.
* 31 December 2013. Add 16 pages to Der Spiegel.
* 30 December 2013. Add 50 pages of NSA ANT Catalog by Jacob Appelbaum (no source given for NSA docs).
* 30 December 2013. Add 21 pages from 30C3 video by Jacob Appelbaum (no source given for NSA docs).
* 30 December 2013. Add 42 pages (8 duplicates) to Der Spiegel (no source given for NSA docs).
* 29 December 2013. Add 4 pages to Der Spiegel (no source given for NSA docs).
24 December 2013. Add 2 pages to Washington Post.
23 December 2013
We've yet to see the full impact of former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden's unauthorized downloading of highly classified intelligence documents.
Among the roughly 1.7 million documents he walked away with -- the vast majority of which have not been made public -- are highly sensitive, specific intelligence reports, as well as current and historic requirements the White House has given the agency to guide its collection activities, according to a senior government official with knowledge of the situation.
The latter category involves about 2,000 unique taskings that can run to 20 pages each and give reasons for selective targeting to NSA collectors and analysts. These orders alone may run 31,500 pages.
13 December 2013. Add 26 pages to Trojkan (SVT). Tally now 797 pages (~1.4%) of reported 58,000. NSA head claims 200,000 (~.40% of that released). Australia press reports "up to 20,000 Aussie files."
Rate of release over 6 months, 132.8 pages per month, equals 436 months to release 58,000, or 36.3 years. Thus the period of release has decreased in the past month from 42 years.
12 December 2013. Belatedly add 27 pages to Guardian and 18 pages to Washington Post.
21 November 2013. See also EFF and ACLU accounts:
Timeline of releases:
[See tabulation below for full timeline.]
5 October 2013
26 Years to Release Snowden Docs by The Guardian
Out of reported 15,000 pages, The Guardian has published 192 pages in fourteen releases over four months, an average of 48 pages per month, or 1.28% of the total. At this rate it will take 26 years for full release.
|27 February 2014||GCHQ Optic Nerve||3|
|21||16 January 2014||SMS Text Messages Exploit||8|
|20||9 December 2013||Spying on Games||2|
|18||18 November 2013||DSD-3G||6|
|19||1 November 2013||PRISM, SSO
|18||4 October 2013||Types of IAT Tor||9|
|17||4 October 2013||Egotistical Giraffe||20*|
|16||4 October 2013||Tor Stinks||23|
|15||11 September 2013||NSA-Israel Spy||5|
|14||5 September 2013||BULLRUN||6*|
|13||5 September 2013||SIGINT Enabling||3*|
|12||5 September 2013||NSA classification guide||3|
|11||31 July 2013||XKeyscore||32|
|10||27 June 2013||DoJ Memo on NSA||16|
|9||27 June 2013||Stellar Wind||51|
|8||21 June 2013||FISA Certification||25|
|7||20 June 2013||Minimization Exhibit A||9|
|6||20 June 2013||Minimization Exhibit B||9|
|5||16 June 2013||GCHQ G-20 Spying||4|
|4||8 June 2013||Boundless Informant FAQ||3|
|3||8 June 2013||Boundless Informant Slides||4|
|2||7 June 2013||PPD-20||18|
|1||5 June 2013||Verizon||4|
|9 July 2014||NSA Emails||1|
|18 March 2014||NSA SCALAWAG||2|
|18 March 2014||NSA MYSTIC||2|
|2 January 2014||Quantum Computer 2||10|
|2 January 2014||Quantum Computer||3|
|23 December 2013||NSA/CSS Mission||2|
|11 December 2013||Excessive Collection||9|
|11 December 2013||SCISSORS 2||7|
|11 December 2013||SCISSORS 1||4|
|11 December 2013||Yahoo-Google Exploit||6|
|11 December 2013||Cable Spying Types||7|
|11 December 2013||WINDSTOP||1|
|11 December 2013||Co-Traveler||24|
|11 December 2013||GSM Tracking||2|
|11 December 2013||SIGINT Successes||4|
|11 December 2013||GHOSTMACHINE||4|
|5 December 2013||Target Location||1|
|4 December 2013||FASCIA||2|
|4 December 2013||CHALKFUN||1|
|26 November 2013||Microsoft a Target?||4|
|4 November 2013||WINDSTOP, SSO, Yahoo-Google||14|
|30 October 2013||MUSCULAR-INCENSOR Google and Yahoo||4|
|14 October 2013||SSO Overview||4|
|14 October 2013||SSO Slides||7|
|14 October 2013||SSO Content Slides||9|
|4 October 2013||Tor||49|
|4 October 2013||EgotisticalGiraffe||20*|
|4 October 2013||GCHQ MULLENIZE||2|
|4 October 2013||Roger Dingledine||2|
|30 August 2013||Budget||17|
|10 July 2013||PRISM Slide||1|
|29 June 2013||PRISM||8|
|20 June 2013||Warrantless Surveillance||25*|
|7 June 2013||PPD-20||18*|
|6 June 2013||PRISM||1|
|Der Spiegel||* 1,278|
|17 January 2015||NSA Prepares for Cyber Battle||199|
|28 December 2014||NSA Attacks on VPN, SSL, TLS, SSH, Tor 197MB||666|
|14 September 2014||GCHQ STELLAR||26|
|14 September 2014||NSA Treasure Map||38|
|14 September 2014||NSA Treasure Map New||4|
|31 August 2014||NSA GCHQ Spy Turkey||34|
|23 June 2014||NSA German SIGADs||9|
|18 June 2014||NSA German Spying-2||200|
|16 June 2014||NSA German Spying||4|
|29 March 2014||NSA Spy Chiefs of State||1|
|22 March 2014||NSA SHOTGIANT 2||2
|31 December 2013||QFIRE||* 16|
|30 December 2013||TAO Introduction||* 16|
|30 Deceber 2013||QUANTUM Tasking (8 duplicates of QUANTUMTHEORY)||28*|
|30 December 2013||QUANTUMTHEORY||14|
|29 December 2013||TAO ANT COTTONMOUTH (images)
TAO ANT COTTONMOUTH (DE article)
|17 November 2013||ROYAL CONCIERGE (DE)
ROYAL CONCIERGE (EN)
|29 October 2013||NSA-CIA SCS||3|
|27 October 2013||NSA-CIA SCS||2|
|20 October 2013||Mexico President||1|
|20 September 2013||Belgacom||3|
|16 September 2013||SWIFT||3|
|9 September 2013||Smartphones||5|
|1 September 2013||French Foreign Ministry||0|
|31 August 2013||Al Jazeera||0|
|O Globo Fantastico||~87|
|7 October 2013||CSE Brazil Ministry||7|
|8 September 2013||Petrobas||~60|
|3 September 2013||Brazil and Mexico||20|
|New York Times||216|
|15 August 2015||NSA SSO Fairview Stormbrew Blarney (with Propublica)||74|
|4 June 2015
4 June 2015
|NSA Expands Phone Spying at Borders
NSA Expands Phone Spying at Borders 2
|22 December 2014||NSA Tracks Zarrar Shah||1|
|1 June 2014||NSA Identity Spying||4|
|22 March 2014||NSA Huawei SHOTGIANT||2|
|12 March 2014||NSA Stellarwind Classification
NSA FISA FAA Classification
NSA Cryptanalyist FISA Database
NSA Spying Timeline
|9 December 2013||Spying on Games||82*|
|23 November 2013||SIGINT Strategy 2012-2016||5|
|3 November 2013||SIGINT Mission 2013||22|
|28 September 2013||Contact Chaining Social Networks||1|
|28 September 2013||SYANPSE||1|
|5 September 2013||BULLRUN||4*|
|5 September 2013||SIGINT Enabling||3*|
|15 August 2015||NSA SSO Fairview Stormbrew Blarney (with NY Times)||74*|
|9 December 2013||Spying on Games||82*|
|5 September 2013||BULLRUN||4*|
|5 September 2103||SIGINT Enabling||3*|
|21 March 2014||CSE SNOWGLOBE||7|
|25 October 2013||NSA Hosts FR Spies||4|
|22 October 2013||Wanadoo-Alcatel||1|
|22 October 2013||Close Access Sigads||2|
|22 October 2013||Boundless Informant||2|
|22 October 2013||PRISM||11|
|19 November 2013||BOUNDLESSINFORMANT||13|
|12 March 2014||NSA Aids Dutch Anti-Piracy||2|
|8 February 2014||MIVD BoundlessInformant
|30 November 2013||Dutch SIGINT||3|
|23 November 2013||SIGINT Cryptologic Platform||1|
|27 November 2013||Muslim Porn Viewing||3|
|22 May 2015||US-UK-CA-AU-NZ Cellphone Spying||26*|
|24 March 2015||CSEC Cyber Threats||152|
|28 January 2015||CSE LEVITATION-FFU Project||21|
|30 January 2014||CSEC IP Profiling||27|
|10 December 2013||NSA-CSEC Partnership||1|
|10 December 2013||G8-G20 Spying||4*|
|2 December 2013||G8-G20 Spying||3|
|29 November 2013||G8-G20 Spying||1|
|The Globe and Mail||18|
|30 November 2013||CSEC Brazil Spying||18*|
|SVT (Swedish TV)||2|
|5 December 2013||Sweden Spied Russia for NSA||2|
|6 December 2013||NSA Spies Italy||3|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA Relationship||1*|
|11 December 2013||NSA 5 Eyes Partners||1|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA Agenda||8|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA RU Baltic||1|
|11 December 2013||NSA GCHQ Sweden FRA COMINT||1|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA XKeyscore Plan||5|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA XKeyscore Sources||1|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA XKeyscore Tor et al||3|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA XKeyscore Slide||1|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA Quantum 1||1|
|11 December 2013||GCHQ Sweden FRA Quantum||1|
|11 December 2013||NSA Sweden FRA Quantum Accomplishments||2|
|9 December 2013||NSA and Sweden Pact||3*|
|Jacob Appelbaum||* 71|
|30 December 2013||NSA Catalog||* 50|
|30 December 2013||NSA Catalog Video Clips||* 21|
|19 June 2014||NSA Partners||41*|
|14 January 2014||SSO (duplicate)||7*|
|14 January 2014||PRISM (duplicate)||11*|
|13 January 2014||5-Eyes Spy G8-G20 (duplicate)||4*|
New York Times
|27 January 2014||NSA Smartphones Analysis||14|
|27 January 2014||GCHQ Mobile Theme||4|
|25 February 2014||GCHQ Cyber Effects||11|
|7 February 2014||GCHQ Cyber Attack||15|
|5 February 2014||GCHQ Anonymous||14|
|27 January 2014||GCHQ Squeaky Dolphin||47|
|28 September 2015||NSA Rogue Olympics||21|
|24 September 2015||NSA-GCHQ 29 Documents||283|
|11 August||NSA SIGINT Philosopher||29|
|3 August 2015||NSA ECHELON||7
|16 July 2015||NSA Manhunting||8|
|1 July 2015||NSA XKeyscore and More||1,264|
|26 June 2015||NSA on NYT Warrantless Wiretap Story||13|
|22 June 2015||GCHQ 11 Filles||250|
|12 June 2015||NSA SID Hacker Interview||4|
|28 May 2015||NSA SID Today||23|
|22 May 2015||US-UK-CA-AU-NZ Cellphone Spying||26*|
|21 May 2015||NSA Medical Spying||10|
|19 May 2015||NSA SID NATO||19|
|18 May 2015||JTAC Attack Methodology||3|
|18 May 2015||NCTC Major Terrorism Figures||1|
|18 May 2015||Black Budget Bin Laden Raid||2|
|8 May 2015||NSA SKYNET||40|
|5 May 2015||NSA Black Budget SID RT10 WG Language||46|
|2 April 2015||NSA GCHQ JTRIG Argentina-Iran||7|
|10 March 2015||NSA Apple DPA Cryptanalysis||12|
|19 February 2015||GCHQ PCS Harvesting At Scale||32|
|10 February 2015||NSA Iran GCHQ||2|
|5 February 2015||DNI NATO Cyber Panel||3|
|4 February 2015||GCHQ Lovely Horse et al||5|
|13 December 2014||GCHQ Belgacom Hack||67|
|4 December 2014||NSA AURORA GOLD et al||63|
|10 October 2014||10 NSA Releases
Computer Network Exploitation Declass
National Initiative Task Security 2
National Initiative Task Security 1
Exceptionally Controlled Info Compartments
Exceptionally Controlled Info Pawleys
Exceptionally Controlled Information
Sentry Eagle 2
Sentry Eagle 1
Tarex Classification Guide
Whipgenie Classification Guide
|17 September 2014||NSA Visit by NZ Spy||2|
|5 September 2014||Masterspy Quadrennial Report 2009||32|
|25 August 2014||NSA ICREACH||55|
|12 August 2014||GCHQ Covert Mobile Phones Policy||6|
|5 August 2014||NCTC Terrorist Identifies||12|
|4 August 2014||US-NSA Pays Israel $500,000||2|
|4 August 2014||NSA-Israel Spying Pact 2013||3|
|4 August 2014||Israel-US Spying Pact 1999||16|
|25 July 2014||NSA Saudi Arabia||4|
|14 July 2014||NSA JTRIG Tools-Techniques||8|
|9 July 2014||NSA FISA Accounts||8|
|19 June 2014||NSA Partners||41*|
|19 May 2014||12 Various Pages||12|
|30 April 2014||GHOSTMACHINE-ECHOBASE
NSA Visit by GCHQ Lobban
PRISM with Olympics
|4 April 2014||GCHQ Full Spectrum Cyber
NSA 5-Eyes SIGDEV Conference
|20 March 2014||NSA Hunt Sysadmins||6|
|13 March 2014||NSA Third Party||1|
|12 March 2014||NSA Hammerchant||4
|7 March 2014||NSA Ask Zelda||8|
|24 February 2014||GCHQ Disruption||4|
|24 February 2014||GCHQ Online Deception
(7 pages duplicates of GCHQ Psychology)
|18 February 2014||GCHQ Psychology
37 Duplicates of NBC News
|18 February 2014||NSA-GCHQ Discovery||1|
|13 May 2014||A variety of documents||107|
|26 January 2015||Citizenfour Snowden Documentary High Definition (7-Zip MP4) (3.6GB)||~|
|25 January 2015||Citizenfour Snowden Documentary (7-Zipped MP4) (1.2GB)||~|
|23 May 2014||No Place to Hide (27MB)||310|
|16 August 2014||NSA GCHQ CSEC HACIENDA||26|
|25 November 2014||Vodafone GCHQ Cables List and Slides||72|
|22 January 2015||87 Citizenfour Screengrabs||87|
|New Zealand Herald||20|
|14 March 2015||GCSB Targets Solomons||2|
|10 March 2015||NSA-New Zealand Relationship||8|
|6 March 2015||GCSB XKeyscore 2||4|
|5 March 2015||GCSB XKeyscore||6|
|New Zealand Star Times||35|
|8 March 2015||GCSB XKeyscore 3||35|
Liberty versus Anarchy
Liberty Versus Anarchy
by Alvin Boyd Kuhn
* Typed and edited by Juan Schoch for educational research purposes. This notice is not to be removed.
The antonym of liberty is generally considered to be slavery, but in another direction the antonym can be anarchy. It surely needs no elaborate dissertation to demonstrate that liberty without regulation of what use is made of it can run amuck into license, into anarchy.
When Plato and Socrates in the Athenian Academy undertook to determine by the profoundest dialectic how man might learn to know and to do the thing that was good, their every effort brought them in the end to the necessity of asking the question: good – for what? They found that the good of a thing or act was in every instance only determinable by knowing the good purpose it was to subserve. One must know specifically what anything is good for.
It is much the same with so broad and general a thing as liberty. In the present critical junction of world affairs, when the issue between two most powerful parties is ostensibly freedom of bondage, it seems highly necessary that the great and momentous principle so loosely termed liberty should be dialectically scrutinized with a view to bringing it to a sounder basis of specific determination. As a preliminary observation it might be said perhaps that more important than liberty itself in the final issue is the question of what use is made of it.
It is of course a commonplace item of knowledge that with liberty goes obligation; that freedoms and exemptions from tyranny are not completely gratuitous, but demand some measure of obligation, restriction or performance to make them possible in the first place. It is a venerable axiom in law that a state can not guarantee liberty to its citizens unless they surrender at least a fringe – and it may need to be a wide fringe – of their complete or absolute freedom. For in the simplest terms a state can not be a state unless its citizenry delegates to its executive government the power to bridle, restrict and regulate certain actions of its individuals. No state can grant to its people the complete liberty to do as they please. This would yield the anomalous situation of a people organizing a government which would abrogate all governing. Each individual of a state must empower the central authority to exercise certain forms of control over his own actions so that a uniform control can be established. No government can exist until the whole community agrees upon certain concepts or principles of uniform behavior by the enforcement of which they aim to obviate anarchy and establish a settled order, and then delegate the right to enforce these codes upon the whole group. In effect it can be stated that the citizen in a democracy voluntarily surrenders a portion of his liberty to the state in order that he and all others may be secured in the exercise of a large measure of individual freedom.
The constant and vital question, then, is at what point to draw the line between the margin of liberty delegated and the portion reserved. In a democratic nation this eventuates in the prescription of what things the individual member may do and what he may not do. With the power delegated to it by the citizenry the central governing body determines what rules shall be put in force in the community and these enactments become “laws.”
All this is elementary, but we step from rudiments to most abstruse complexity the moment we consider what laws are best for the welfare of all and then face the final question of fixing the standards or codes of values by which the good of any and all laws is to be gauged. The point developed here is crucial not only for establishing a well-ordered society, but for regulating our lives in general. In the margin of power we delegate to central government we must all act alike; but in the portion reserved we may act differently from our fellows. So liberty is to be considered under its two aspects, liberty in society and individual liberty.
In both phases the ever-insistent and always ultimate question is: liberty to do what? It is a sad matter of fact that in the majority of the people in democracies the ideas associated with the term “liberty” are so vague and undefined as to be largely fatuous. To most minds the term simply connotes a general notion of absence of interference, a massive sense of license to do whatever one might wish to do. And the most fatuous form of its general conception is unhappily found in the form of persuasion that liberty gives the right to do nothing at all, or at any rate to do as little as one must to keep going. Most generally with liberty goes the idea that one may get by with the minimum of activity necessary. People resent the idea of the government stepping in to compel them to do something, entirely oblivious of the preciousness of the government’s guaranteeing them the freedom to do the things they like best to do. The point in the discussion here may seem to be a bit overdrawn, but it is made to accentuate the idea that all too universally the popular conception of liberty is negative with little or no realization of the supreme ultimate importance of knowing what to do with it positively. What we do when we have liberty determines our life and destiny. What to do with liberty is the eternal question confronting the individual and society.
There must be much truth in the observation that what one does with leisure time provides a most telling key to one’s character, quality and status of being. The common phrase, “to kill time,” is ominous in our current society. That free time is not everywhere regarded as a thing in itself, pregnant with opportunity, eagerly to be grasped and utilized for the thing one’s life is most keenly devoted to accomplishing, is an evidence of the aimlessness and meaninglessness of our world consciousness today. The psychologist Jung has declared that, even before the First World War “Europe is a madhouse,” and assigned as the reason, the total want of philosophical purposefulness in the European family. For if all action under law is determined by some standard of evaluation of what is best, we come to the recognition at last that philosophy, the science that would give us these standards and norms of value, is the science of ultimate human importance.
It is and must be so, because in the end it is the science that determines what use we shall make of all other sciences. It fully deserves the eminent rank which the ancients accorded to it in designating it as the Kingly Science, or the King of Sciences. Humans can not live without philosophy. Millions naively assume that philosophy plays no material part in their lives. They are mistaken. It may be an “Irish” way of stating it, but the truth is that if one asserts that he has no philosophy, he has a very bad one. Action can hardly be without motive or reason, and the motive, whatever it be, constitutes the rudiment of a philosophy. And the portentous fact of the matter is that if it is not in some way the element of a right philosophy, evil consequences flow from it. The “noble eightfold path” designed to implement the four truths of Buddhism includes always right knowledge, right motive, right action. The difference between one’s philosophy being a right one and an erroneous one generates the difference between happiness and tragedy.
It is the general conception that democracy provides the citizenry with the minimum margin of restriction and compulsion, and the largest area of freedom. As long as freedom in this major portion of the citizen’s life is denied, liberty is the prime issue in the nation’s life. But from the moment this generous amount of freedom is guaranteed, the issue of liberty ceases to be important. The crucial issue then becomes the question of what the individuals in the nation shall do with their liberty. The concern then shifts from the possession of liberty to the use to be made of it. The possession of freedom is hardly a positive thing in itself; it only provides the basic opportunity to live. How to live and what to live for then loom as the crucial concerns in our mortal life.
The discussion of the theme takes on major significance in view of the fact that certain religio-philosophical cult movements today are emphasizing liberty as in itself the heart and nub of their teachings and preachings. The word is made a shibboleth embodying the essence of a complete living philosophy all by itself. The liberty indicated is of course not in the political area but in the religious, philosophical and intellectual domain. The devotees of such cults are urged to cut themselves loose from any and all traditional systems proffering codes of moral, spiritual and philosophical truth.
The keynote of the preachment is that the soul of man can not burgeon out into the full glory and ecstasy of its innate potentiality as long as it binds itself mentally under the influence of any set of traditional forms of belief. The individual is exhorted to stand free in his divine liberty, released from the evil inhibitions of all forms of mental imposition, even of his own making. This indoctrination goes so far as to declare that all the endeavors of the human spirit to seek the true, the beautiful and the good – for these are the ultimate aims of religion and philosophy, art and culture – have been so much wasted effort, so much inconsequential rubbish. The gospel is simply the quest of freedom. No obligation is recognized by cult leaders to instruct their following in what
use to make of their freedom. In fact it is preached that one should not seek to learn what should be done with the minds thus emptied of all content of specific knowledge. The claim on which all this is based is that when the mind has been entirely cleared of all the rubbish of worldly culture, divine transports of transcendental felicity and seraphic bliss will quickly fill up the vacant area of consciousness. As long as a mind is cluttered up with debris of religion, philosophy, psychology and even science, the absolute ecstasy can not supervene.
One, however, is prompted to ask if this is not legitimately comparable and analogous to the folly of giving a primary schoolboy a slate, on which he could learn the rudiments of reading, writing and arithmetic and the wisdom they can yield, but told he dare not write anything on it. The cult persuasion and teaching is that the free spirit of man should not be bound by such things as the laws of thought, the canons of reason, literary modes of communicating ideas or the science of number and the relations of the data confronting us in life.
It has been a canon of truth widely accepted in the most intelligent circles that there is no liberty save under law. To announce liberty without codes of right and standards of truth to be obeyed in the exercise of it is to proclaim anarchy through the land to all the inhabitants thereof. It needs to be said with some vigor, in view of the appeal of such cult “philosophies” to uncritical thousands in our democracy, that liberty, divorced from sound philosophy, liberty that flouts the principles of universal law and the canons of truth, liberty that scorns organic knowledge and would destroy the work of the intellect, is only a substanceless will-o’the-wisp, a mirage, a phantom of a dream. It is indeed a fatal fire to lure deluded visionaries on to loss of life’s true good. Such liberty is moral, intellectual and philosophical anarchy, because it recognizes no law except to obey its inner urge to consummate a promised delirium of bliss.
As there is always the possibility that philosophical anarchy can clash with the due obedience to a state’s political statutes, it has at times become necessary for governments to restrict the exercise of such intellectual freedoms. It seems not to be generally known that the early Christians were persecuted by the Roman Emperors, not because of their religion, as Rome tolerated many diverse forms of cult religion at that time, but because of their disregard of certain of the political statutes, particularly the one forbidding meetings at night. Since then religious bodies themselves have found it perilous to permit unbounded “anarchy of the free spirit” to run riot in their communions. Such freedom can at times overthrow long-established institutions and governments, so that in the end society stands or falls by the sort of philosophy its larger units develop. Only by a right philosophy will we be safeguarded from letting our liberty slip into anarchy.
Nietzsche, it was, who said that he who would be a superman must live dangerously. But all live dangerously, for life itself is dangerous. The possibility of calamity hovers near at all times. And in this sense, liberty is one of the most dangerous things that can be given to mortals, so dangerous that it never can be given on absolute terms. This is self-evident for the simple reason that it gives carte blanche to do the wrong thing as well as the right. A government can only try to imitate the laws of life, which, in granting liberty to its children, affixes penalties to violations of what it establishes as right. Any philosophical system which preaches liberty without defining some basic principles by which conduct is to be regulated and order and security maintained is simply basking in idealistic moonshine. Life must grant its children liberty, and so must governments, and if a philosophical system aims to do the same, it must prescribe the laws of thought and of truth in harmony with which life may be lived in beatitude.
If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.
Cops Illegally Raid Couple’s Organic Farm, Assault them Both because they are “Constitutionalists”
Alice’s Washington Wonderland
Americans for a Free Republic
Trump Tax Plan: Pros and Cons
Top U.S. companies at war with Christians
SoT - Paul Craig Roberts Pt 2: The U.S. Faces Catastrophic Financial Risk
Please like my Freedom Watch Facebook page and share it with friends:
The Education of LOVE
The Education of LOVE
by Alvin B. Kuhn
* Electronically typed and edited by Juan Schoch for educational research purposes. This notice is not to be removed.
In a recent article in the NEW OUTLOOK – “Why Not Try Love?” – we suggested in the final sentence that Prof. Ashley Montagu (author of On Being Human) should now write a book on The Education of Love. A NEW OUTLOOK editor was moved to propose that perhaps we should try our hand at the job in the meantime, and so this article will be a hesitant and tentative effort to present some ideas on this tremendous theme.
To begin with, the attempt is complicated by the fact that in the eyes of the world-at-large love just does not need any education. Love is, in this respect, regarded somewhat as being equivalent to the sex feeling, which without any particular education knows what it is commissioned to do, dictates its own terms, and sweeps through spontaneously to its objectives. Love and sex are indeed closely akin to each other, as integrated aspects of the same great force, and love should be, and in very great measure surely is, the generator of education. Indeed, it probably outranks all other motivations as a force driving humans to educative activities. Love of music, love of adventure, of philosophy, of power, of money, of nature, of humanity; romantic love and Platonic love – all inspire or drive us to train, discipline and educate ourselves.
With this view goes the common presumption that love is unerring and infallible in its aim and in its wisdom. Love is sure that it can never be wrong; it seems to carry its own justification with it, furnishes its own proof, and ever vindicates its rightness. To this universal opinion it may be necessary, in an ultimate sense, to give assent. One must surely be rightly oriented with life and truth if one’s actions are generated and inspired by love. Yet default of Love is the great human shortcoming, the saddest and most tragic human dereliction, the deplorable cause of most of man’s gross inhumanity to man.
If our answer is correct, if our analysis stands up, love can never be wrong in its motivation, in its aim and objective, but it can be quite wrong in the choice of objective and its particularized mode of striving toward that objective.
Love is a principle evolved by Life to further its advance toward its own objective, which is, ultimately, the greater evolution of consciousness, and as such, love can never be wrong. But love as the force that dictates given actions in given cases, love as the judge that determines the choice of particular procedures, may (and all too frequently does) err in its judgments. One may love the wrong thing or the wrong person. Too often we love things, hobbies, interests, addictions, or people that work to our detriment and injure others as well as ourselves. We love our minor or major forms of habit, our pet foibles; we cling to our vices or our insane habitudes.
Perhaps this is using the word “love” in a sense not fully consistent with what it should connote for the purposes envisaged in our discussion. But if we deal with the word we must take it in the connotations it carries in common speech and common thought. There can not be too wide a distinction made between variant uses of the term – between love of such things as card-playing, baseball, dancing, fishing, an automobile, a person, a pet dog, a book, a sonata, on the one hand; and love of beauty, truth and goodness in the abstract, on the other.
In all such cases, love is the set or cast of feeing directed upon or wrapped up in the particular object loved. It is psychologically the same kind of force poured out upon a variety of things. The difference in the things loved may mark distinctions in its character, its purity, its measures of force, or differentiations in its feeling modes. But all its manifestations must still be subsumed under one nature and definition. Love is still one thing, however wide the range and difference of its objectives. One can even be in love with love itself, just as consciousness can be made the object of its own activity.
Again, it is strange that love should be ideally regarded as infallible when another universal shibboleth says that “love is blind.” This old adage seems to say that in the sweep and strength of its great nobility of motive, love will overlook all considerations of advantage or disadvantage, gain or loss, good or evil choice. It sees only the glory of its main consecration in an all-enveloping aura of attractiveness, and by the very beauty of this picture it will be prevented from seeing subsidiary facts or items that may come in to defeat its splendid expectations.
Oddly, too, while revered Scriptures assert love to be the consummate attribute, the synthetic principle of all righteousness, and the fulfillment of all law, they do not give it the first place in a practical program of human effort. They do not say “without love the people perish,” but, “without vision the people perish.” They do not say, with all thy getting get love, as more precious than rubies, and sweeter than honey, and greater than all the things one can desire. The Scriptures say, first and foremost, get wisdom, get understanding.
We are not told that the cause of all human ill and tragedy is the want or default of love; that one great cause is named ignorance. The Buddha ascribed all human suffering to ignorance alone. Hermes – greatest, perhaps, of all teachers – says that “the vice of a soul is ignorance; the virtue of a soul is knowledge.”
Socrates and Plato spent years in the search to find and name what constitutes the good in life, and the conclusion to which dialectical reasoning forced them, every time, was that the ultimate good thing is knowledge. The want of knowledge, they found, generated all evil. In short, they demonstrated, by the most invincible logic, that being or doing good in every case depended on knowing: knowing first what was the good thing to do, then knowing best how to do it.
Platonic philosophy institutes a distinction – and a crucial one – between what is good and what is right. It determines that a thing is good only and always when it is also right. The “good” motive or objective of an act guarantees neither its rectitude nor its beneficence. It provides no certainty that the act might not inflict wreckage or do injury, as it will if guided by a wrong course of procedure. Thus, we may conclude, Love will wish to do that which is always good.
But, the philosophers asked, how is the always fallible human going to know of a certainty what the good thing is? Love may be yearning and aching to perform the good service; but does it know surely how that service can best be rendered? The necessity of having love-impulses directed by knowledge is obvious, and it should simplify our discussion to realize that if love yearns to achieve its objectives it must know how to implement the procedures that will bring them about.
Both abstruse Greek dialectic and plain simple thinking, therefore, give us the proper answer to the query about love’s education. We have it in the obvious realization that love as an emotion is only one half of the potential, the other half – almost always left out of consideration – being knowledge. And this amounts to saying (what idealists are too often impatient and reluctant to hear) that if the deep and loving aspirations and devotions of the heart are to eventuate in good, and not run the imminent risk of working injury, they must call in the services of the head.
Now, it is a striking fact that in all highly “spiritual” religious philosophy, the “heart” attributes of man’s consciousness have been given precedence in importance and vital function over the “head” qualities. Nearly all movements in religious history aiming to bring about the spiritual unity and fraternity of mankind, have worked on the presumption that if only the heart of the masses can be brought to an attitude of mutual love and brotherhood, the ideal of a world at peace in the community of love can be directly achieved.
The odd thing about this belief is that, judging by the multitudinous prevalence and the sincere and earnest character of the movements so generated and motivated, the “heart” is already in right posture and relation to the task! Thousands of religious movements and cults, practically without exception, proclaim their consecration to the principle of a loving attitude and purpose, and their wish to extend their love to all others; or to meet all others in the spirit of love.
What is it, then, that continues to hold such movements aloof from each other and defeat their fraternization? The sad answer is: the head. While “hearts” beat together in a common accord and good will, minds generate points of disagreement. It is ever the head that blocks the way to what the heart approves or desires, and because the mind is the perpetual obstacle and divider, it has gained the disfavor and obloquy of religionists generally. The tendency, then, has mostly been to ignore, disregard and suppress the mind, so that the force of pure spiritual love may drive unobstructed toward its goal.
A better discernment makes it apparent that this attitude is mistaken. It disowns and dodges the obligation to take action for unity in the very quarter where right action would bring positive results! Granted, the mind causes difference and division, and blocks the road to amity. Then, must it not be through the mind that the possibility of unity can be recognized?
The pacifist spirit of most religionism has dictated the policy of avoiding the clash of opposing views, and shying away from religious controversy. The result has been a reciprocity of sullen silence, broken only by occasional insinuations of error, or mild protest and criticism. Love is thus perpetually deprived of its chance to exercise its miracle-working power of dissolving hatreds and reconciling differences. If we are to love our enemies, we must at least have the opportunity to come to know them – even if, at first, we know them only as embattled opponents. Love cannot fight in the dark or at too great a distance.
If the mind divides, then the mind must learn how to bring dissident elements together in harmony, and to discover the grounds for harmony. There lies the field and the necessity of the mind’s education.
As Plato and Socrates so clearly demonstrated, love must end its blindness, open its mental eyes, and become intelligent. Else its sweet and gentle overtures, put out in the welter of human ignorance and passions, greeds and lusts, will merely make it the sheep-like sacrificial victim led to the slaughter – and that, perhaps, with little really sweet savor rising from the altar to titillate the nostrils of deity! I suggest that in all likelihood the Scriptural injunction urging spiritual aspirants to be both gentle as doves and wise as serpents was motivated by this understanding.
Thus it is evident that the education of love lies in the realm of the mind, it being assumed that the heart – the disposition to love one’s fellows – is already rightly oriented to the task. This shifts the problem from the heart to the head, from right feeling to right intelligence.
At once this conclusion seems to the ardent idealist to throw a wet blanket over the glowing fire of the love-motive, to check or even to extinguish the flame of divine beauty. It is felt that love is its own law, and should not need to undergo rigorous training, the dull routine of learning, of discipline. Its spontaneous impulses of beauty and generosity are deemed sufficient to set their own standards of wisdom. Love, it will be said, can be trusted to bring to all questions and situations its own automatic discernment and decisive understanding.
To this faith, there can only be offered the contrary verdict of both history and general observation. The glowing claims of love’s certitude and invariable rightness must give way before the record of its constant blundering. Or, if it does often act with happy consequences, this is evidence that, to some extent, it must have already had much education. We must recognize as a self-evident fact that to love effectively, beneficently, one must love wisely. If nothing else does so, marriage definitely has proved that the business of loving, faces almost certain wreckage or failure, unless it is salvaged by the counsels of the head.
To bring out the sweet melodies and harmonies of the love-capability in the human psyche, one must master the infinitely complex artistry of striking the right chords on all four of the elements of our psychic life: sense, emotion, thought, and highest spirit. Whether the realization chills or thrills us, loving is not merely a matter of the sheer vehemence of our fervent love-impulse. It is rather a matter of being able, when highly inspired by love’s divine ardor, to strike those chords that will blend in sweet and soothing harmony, instead of producing a rasping discord. Ultimately, this demands adeptship in the whole science of living.
October 5, 2015 | Permalink