How We Master Our Fate E-Book

Ursula N. Gestefeld

• Herausgeber: Andura Publishing
• Kategorie: Ratgeber
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2020

Beschreibung

Experience the life-changing power of Ursula N. Gestefeld with this unforgettable book.

Das E-Book wird angeboten von und wurde mit folgenden Begriffen kategorisiert:

Leseprobe

How We Master Our Fate

Ursula N Gestefeld

CONTENTS

The Inventor and the Invention

Law or Chance?

Ascension of Ideas

Relation of the Visible to the Invisible

The Common Ground of Oriental and Occidental Philosophy

Living by Insight or by Outsight

Destiny and Fate

Where the Senses Belong

Servant or Master?

The Man and the Woman in our Dream-consciousness

How to Care for the Body

The Germs of Disease

The Power and Powerlessness of Heredity

Words as Storage Batteries

The Origin of Evil

Letting the Dead Bury its Dead

What is Within the ” Here”?

The Hidden Body

The Way to Happiness

The Voice that is Heard in Loneliness

The Language, of Suggestion

The Ingrafted Word and what Comes of it

The Law of Liberty

Constructive Imagination

Incarnation—the Purpose of Nature Fulfilled

Preface

Practically, if not theoretically, we admit the element of chance or luck in the government of our lives and consequently believe in fate; believe that many of our conditions and experiences are beyond our power of control and must be endured with as much fortitude as we are able to command.

We have become accustomed to look to the hereafter as the only possible state of freedom from the tyranny of circumstance, and have given to present endurance an amount of energy better expended-in gaining control.

To see destiny instead of fate, law and order in place of luck or chance, is to see the possibility of control; it is to expend our energy in co-operation with law and thus gain those results which are practical proofs that destiny is master of fate, and we rulers of circumstance instead of its blind slaves.

These pages are given in the hope that by their means the road that leads from servitude to mastery may present itself to some who are wandering in a wilderness, seeking a way and finding none. They direct attention to neither stars nor “spirits” but to the ever-present possibilities of the human soul and how they can be developed. They teach concentration, and not needless diffusion, of energy; self-reliance instead of a misplaced dependence upon anything in the heaven above or the earth beneath.

Published originally in THE EXODUS they are now presented in a compact form which enables them to be kept readily at hand as an inspirer of better thoughts and efforts when the drudgery of daily life weighs heavily upon us.

Ursula N. Gestefeld

The Inventor and the Invention

It is self-evidently true that if one wishes to solve a problem correctly he needs to be acquainted with the factors concerned in it. Attempts to reach a right conclusion without this acquaintance will prove abortive, and the worker, however persistent for a time, will become discouraged.

Like attempts to solve the problem of existence, individual and universal, have resulted, for many, in a fatalism paralyzing in its effects, a result mitigated in great or less degree by the moral or ethical sense as it assumes control.

While it would seem a mistake, at first sight, to assume that the collective attitude of religious bodies is a species of fatalism, and because it is one of faith in an overruling power, critical examination will show this faith to be destitute of the element which would save it from that quality.

There is a faith which results from knowledge and a faith which comes from lack of it. This kind of faith may be beautiful, but the other is more useful. One has a lasting foundation that strikes deeper and deeper with the assaults of experience; the other, one that is liable to weaken.

No teaching is ultimately helpful that declares the powerlessness of the individual in any direction, for its logical sequence is submission to the inevitable. Whether this teaching be religious, philosophic, or scientific, its effect upon the individual, and therefore upon the mass, is not the full development of his powers, but their partial stultification. Though this submission be disguised with the mask of obedience, it is not and cannot become that free and voluntary co-operation with unvarying law, through recognition of its nature, which constitutes obedience. Its “vestigial remains,” carried over from generation to generation, prove it to be a species of fatalism dignified by the name of religion.

Religious and intellectual fatalism are alike undesirable. One is an ignorant faith resulting from lack of knowledge, the other an ignorant knowledge resulting from lack of the perception that leads to true faith. One who recognizes the simple, logical fact that man’s destiny is involved in his origin echoes as his own desire Paul’s utterance—”May the eyes of our understanding be enlightened…till we all come, in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man.”

If carrying to perfection the basic plan is the destiny involved in man’s origin, to be either a religious or an intellectual fatalist is equally a mistake. Unity of faith and knowledge is the essential for fulfilment of this destiny, the essential for the mastery of fate. It is the only basis for obedience in place of submission. Obedience recognizes and honors individuality; submission crushes and extinguishes it. The nature, dignity, and power of individuality is the key-note to be sounded persistently, whose vibrations shall conquer fear and fate with knowledge and surety.

In this series of articles it is to be thus sounded, and the attempt will be made to help to forward that unity of knowledge and faith which brings us finally unto “a perfect man”—the fulfilling of our destiny; an attempt which is primarily the effort to enlighten “the eyes of our understanding” rather than to cultivate dependence upon a mysterious and unknown God, or reliance upon ocular demonstration as the only evidence of truth.

As an illustration of the form of argument to be employed—not forgetting that illustration is always limited and not sufficient to cover the whole ground of perception—let us consider the relation of inventor and invention, and the consequence involved in them and in this relation. The inventor is the beginning or fixed point from which comes the invention. The inventor is the absolute, the invention is the relative. They stand to each other as cause and effect; the relation between them is a logical necessity. Consequently, a third factor appears—the inventive power, the link between cause and effect.

We have here a trinity in unity, a trinity which is a logical sequence, a unity which contains variety. Within this unity is involved a consequence which will evolve from it. If there be the inventor, there must be the inventive power and the Invention. If there be the invention or the inventive power, the other two are necessitated. They stand or fall together. Neither can survive, as the fittest, the destruction of the other two.

We are not obliged to believe and accept this trinity. It is a self-evident truth, and the lasting foundation of all that develops from it. Looking upon this development, or evolving of inherent consequence, as a building, this building is founded upon a rock which no tempest can remove from its place; therefore, the building will stand.

The invention must possess that nature which is derived from its cause. It is not its own cause; therefore, its nature is not self-bestowed. Being derived, its nature and all that enters into it as composite is compelled by the nature of the inventor. The one hinges upon the other. But the invention is not a visible thing, or an object in space seen with the sense of sight. It is idea, not an object in space seen by all who look in its direction.

As the inventor’s idea it is visible to him; it lives and moves and has its being in him. It is whole, complete, and perfect as his perfected idea. To him it is real as having place in his consciousness. To others it is unreal because it is his, ideal; because it has no place in their consciousness.

Before it can become as real to them as it is to him, it must have place in their consciousness. The corresponding idea must be derived from their own natures; their idea must conform to this ideal. How may this be brought about?

They are individual; they are themselves; they are not the inventor. How may the idea arise or form within them, which corresponds to his idea—the invention—and which enables them to see his idea because they see its likeness? In other words, how may the—for them—invisible become the visible, the ideal become the real?

Here a mediator between the two is a help to that end—something that stands between the primal idea and its likeness in the individual consciousness; something which helps all to see and know what the inventor sees and knows. A model representing the inventor’s idea, a working model, is “a means to this end. The reinvention, but, because as a visible object it represents the invention, it suggests it and its nature to the observer.

Visibility of the invention, which is the forming of a correct idea of it in the observer, depends upon how he regards this mediator—this visible representative of the invisible. It may be a help or a hindrance to him, while in itself it is unvarying as a means to an end.

Now let us apply our terms. The inventor is the cause or beginning from which the sequence proceeds, and by the operation of his inventive power. The invention, his idea, is the effect and the expression of his nature. It lives and moves and has its being in him. It is visible to him, known by him, but invisible and unknown to others. How can it be made visible and known to them? How be made plain, obvious, free from obscurity or doubt? How be made manifest?

Clearly, by the arising in them of the corresponding idea—the likeness of the invention.

How may this be brought about?

By a mediator—something which is visible and represents that invention, and which, in consequence, will suggest it to their consciousness.

When, as a result, the observer’s equally complete and perfect idea, which is the likeness of the original idea, is formed within him, the original invisible is manifest to him, becoming the plain, clear, obvious, or visible.

The invention, as the expression, is that which may be understood; it is set forth by its producing cause.

The representation or model is that which is set forth a second time, or is presented anew.

The manifestation is that which is clear and obvious to understanding.

Between the beginning and the end of this sequence there is likeness. As a logical necessity the end must be like the beginning.

The Science of Being is based upon and embodies the view thus illustrated. Before its principles can be applied to the mastery of fate, they must be discerned and approximately understood. They are fundamental and capable of this practical application and demonstration.

Hence the necessity of their consecutive presentation, and the student’s persistent attention to them alone, refraining from carrying along with him a pattern which he continually applies to see if the teaching will conform to it. His motive in studying these principles should be, “Are they true?” not “Do they agree with what I believe?” Belief is sometimes a good servant, but always a bad master.

In the next and succeeding articles the illustration here used will be applied to the nature of man.

Law or Chance

Every observing and reflective mind is sometimes obliged to choose one horn of the dilemma—either all is law and order or all is chance. If chance rules all, if things happen, we might as well take life as easily as possible, for we are sure of nothing but the present moment, and even have our doubts about that. We must be submissive to fate, for it is supreme.

But if all is governed by law, by that which changes not, there is no fate save that which we make for ourselves through our ignorance of law, and submission is unnecessary, obedience is the necessity.

Let us apply to ourselves the illustration in the previous article, using it as a working hypothesis, and see if its application may not throw some light upon the problem of being—upon the factors of that problem.

We find the inventor, the inventive power, and his idea which is the invention, to be a trinity in unity—an indivisible unity, for no one of the three can be separated from the other two. Yet they remain distinct from each other by virtue of the nature of each. Distinctness without separation is a point not to be lost sight of, for much depends upon it further on.

Let us view God as the inventor, God’s power as the inventive power, and man as the invention, and see what kind of a nature he would have in consequence. Clearly, his nature would depend upon the nature of God, as the invention, not only in fact, but in nature, depends upon the inventor.

But man as the invention or idea of Mind would not have the nature the inventor might choose to bestow upon him, for Mind, expressing itself in idea, would have no power of choice, no power to bestow this or that by preference. A human inventor could half-frame an idea, drop it incomplete, take up and complete another. Here a human and materialistic illustration fails to reveal the complete meaning sought to be conveyed.

But if we view God as “the beginning” of man—and of all things—as the inventor is the beginning of the invention, we shall see the definite relation of man to his cause. If we then see that God, as impersonal principle, as Mind, has no power of choice but must express itself, and that man, as the idea of Mind, is its expression, we shall see that the expression must have the nature necessitated by what God is, rather than by what a humanized God might choose to do.

An uncertain nature and fate for man would result from this kind of a God; a positive, changeless nature and an assumed triumphant destiny results from undeviating principle.

Cause and effect are in eternal unity because the one involves and evolves the other. God as Cause or Creator, the ceaseless action of God as Creative Power, and man, as the product or the Created, are, relatively, as the inventor, the inventive power, and the invention. Man lives, moves, and has his being in God. Effect is inherent in Cause. Man exists from God. Effect is projected by its cause. Cause is absolute toward effect; effect is relative to cause.

God is absolute to man; man is relative to God. The inventor is absolute to the invention; the invention is relative to the inventor. The connecting link between the absolute and the relative is the power inherent in and working from the absolute which produces the relative. The inventive power of the inventor, the creative power of the Creator, the Force of Primal Substance, the Motion of Mind—they are the same; they are the moving “of the Spirit of God” which brings something from no-thing.

If man as the something is the expression of God, he is endowed, in consequence, with that nature which nothing can change or destroy. If his cause is eternal, he is eternal, and his destiny is fixed by the fiat of logical necessity. Consequently, there is nothing to fear; and to be convinced that we live and move and have our being in God, is to be free from fear in the proportion that we can feel our conviction. Intellectual freedom comes with conviction; but soul-freedom is ours only when conviction has become feeling.

And here let us pause a moment to note the use of the personal pronoun, “he,” in reference to man. Denoting ordinarily the masculine sex, here it refers to the sexless, or rather the sexfull, being which—rather than “who “—is the expression of God, is the invention of the inventor. We will not dwell upon this point till later. It is referred to here more as a matter of caution than of detailed explanation.

But we found a certain sequence in the illustration of the inventor and invention, a sequence extending beyond the trinity in unity. This trinity gave us the solid foundation for all that rested upon it—for all that was involved in it. While the invention or idea was whole and complete as such, known to the inventor, clearly seen by him as his idea, in itself it was ideal, not practical. It was known to the inventor alone. It was not manifested; and before it could have a practical value, whatever might be its ideal value, it had to be manifested, or demonstrated, to be.

Applying the illustration, we find that man as the idea of Mind may be ideal; but that he must have practical as well as ideal value. He must be demonstrated to be. We may take comfort, however, in the fact—if to us it is a fact—that man is, as the expression of God, all he can possibly be; and we have to put forth no effort in his behalf. We cannot improve the divine idea, neither is it at the mercy of chance. In his relation to God as the effect of cause, he is fixed. We can all say “I am.” We know that we are. Perhaps we are growing able to see, in a degree, why we are and what we are.

If, before the invention has a practical as well as an ideal value, its nature must be demonstrated, the means by which this manifestation is afforded has next place in the sequence. For a corresponding idea must arise in the observer. He must be able to see the inventor’s idea. His own idea must be the likeness of the first. How shall this come to pass?

By the ascension of ideas till the likeness of the divine idea is reached.

If there be ascension of ideas there is a beginning or starting point for them. What is it?

The visible object, the model, the representative of the invisible subject—the thing seen. The thing seen stands between the invention and its demonstrated nature and value. It is a means to an end, but the end must be like the ideal, not like the means.

Yet the means, the object seen, will suggest his first idea to the observer, from which ascent to the likeness of the true ideal must be made; and which will be made as the continued operation of the model*and the continued study of the observer reveal more and more the nature of the invention. This nature will be caught and framed in idea little by little, part by part, till the whole is seen and framed—till the likeness appears in the observer.

Man as the divine idea is to be manifested in like manner. The same sequence obtains with him. He is, but what is he? What is his nature, and what his powers as the idea of Mind, the expression of God? The means to this end must have place in the sequence from First Cause, an additional factor in the problem we are to work out.

The representative of the idea, the model representing the invention, the Figure that stands for the Number, is next in order, and as the object seen, will suggest the first idea to the observer; but his ideas must ascend before the nature of man is revealed, before man’s powers are fully manifested. The observer’s idea must rise to the level of the primal idea, before the sequence is finished. It cannot be complete till the likeness of the original ideal is found in the observer.

We have in this sequence, therefore, expression, representation, and manifestation; expression of “the beginning” of the whole, representation of that expression and manifestation of its nature, by this means; a manifestation which is cumulative, rising higher and higher through the ascension of ideas till the original level is reached.

Shall we not settle it with ourselves once for all by the help of this illustration and its application that so far from making our being greater, devoting our time and energy to that end, we had much better devote them to the gaining of a truer and higher idea of that being—of what we are?

God’s work is all right, we do not need to alter it; but we do need to gain the true idea and understanding of it; and to this end we must correct the idea which has been suggested to us by the object seen. The physical person is not the living being, man, but is only the representative of that being. Looking at it, we have said, “This is I.” Not so. It is the “Not-I.”

But we have named it, called it man, and with this idea have failed to rise to the level of true being. With this idea we have believed in luck, chance, fate; have believed ourselves to be at the mercy of circumstances. “Thou hast said” and according to what we have said has our experience been.

I am. What am I? I am not flesh, blood, bone, and muscle. I am the expression of Deity, possessed of an eternal and changeless nature which waits my recognition for development and manifestation. All things are ultimately possible unto me in consequence, and I am master of fate. Through experience and its revelation I gain, little by little, the true idea of what I am. Nothing appalls me, nothing can daunt me, circumstances cannot control me. I am. “Thou hast said.”

Ascension of Ideas

Did you ever concentrate your attention for even a moment upon the thought—”I, in my real being, am the expression of God?”

If you do this you may feel a force arise from some hidden center within and move gently through you till it becomes a physical sensation—a glow which warms and lightens and strengthens you while the perplexing care, the disheartening sorrow, grow dimmer and dimmer, till, for the moment, they are almost lost to sight.

If this moment could only last! you say. If one could extend it till it became hours, the hours days, the days years, the years forever! If this could be, one would be master of fate. No more corroding care, no more failures in life, no more heart-breaking grief and disappointment. How delightful! But we are not able, you have said. Circumstances are too much for us.

It depends. They may be too much for our actual or developed power of control, but never too much for our potential power. To express God is to have the omnipotent—the God power—focused in our own being, which is its eternal distributing center. Lying latent, or active only along certain lines to the exclusion of others, it is as if it were not, to us. It is not drawn upon, is not consciously put to use. We are swept along by it in the direction in which it is operative, passive, unresistinging, believing that we have no responsibility for the conditions and circumstances in which we find ourselves involved.

To awaken to our true being, to gain the true idea of ourselves, to concentrate our thought upon it, is to get out of this current which sweeps us along, and get back to the eternal fixed center. Here is the throne of the kingdom within from which we must rule our experiences. Here is the still place far removed from the eddies and whirlpools of the current.

Before we can see as we are seen, know as we are known; before what we are can be made plain, clear, obvious to us, the corresponding idea must arise in our consciousness. This is logically necessary to manifestation. Before the God-man can appear to us, our own idea of man must be his likeness. We always see our own idea. We never see another’s except our own is the likeness of his. If we would master fate, here is one of the most vital truths to be remembered.

According to our idea of what we are is our mental action and our feeling. According to these is our life. According to our present life is our future life. The law of cause and effect obtains throughout. Change at any point comes from change in the primary idea. For that change which brings dominion in place of the old subjection, man’s man must give way to God’s man.

Ascension for the human species depends absolutely upon ascension of ideas. Water rises no higher than its source. We are always within the limit of our ideals, never beyond it. Humanity is lifted up only as its idea of self is lifted up. The human race is the aggregate of units. If any one unit displaces for himself man’s man with God’s man—his natural and educated idea with the true idea—that one is a benefactor of the whole race.

In him the divine likeness begins to appear. The divine incarnation has taken place. The Son of God is conceived in man. It is as yet conception only. Its gestation and birth are to come. But the divine babe is within. Later, it will be manifested to the world.

The one whose idea of man is like unto the idea of God—whose idea about himself is in accord with what he is, generically, as the effect of Cause—is a Savior, if he cherishes this ideal till “in the fullness of the time it cometh to pass,” or till it is plain, clear, obvious to others through a life and works. The Christ-child is born within before it can appear in the without.

Do we look for the God-like in mankind? How could we see it, were it there, except we first see it within? The one who is blind to his own potential divinity could not see the Christ were Jesus here to-day. In this blindness he would still cry “Crucify him!” did Jesus declare, “I know whence I come and whither I go.” What we see without is colored and stamped by our own idea; and so the letter-Christian of our own day, the perpetuation of the blinded Jew of other days, declares of the one who holds as his own idea of man the likeness which is true and divine, ” He maketh himself equal with God!” Lacking the insight which reveals the truth, thus it appears to him.

But, logically, cause and effect are at-one or in unity, and forever. The true-in-itself is unaffected by time or circumstance. It is, and it waits. We are blind to it through natural sense. We seek here, there, and everywhere, up and down in the world, for truth—seek with many a stumble by the way, many a pang, many a cry of suffering, and all the while it is right at our hand, waiting for our eyes to open. The new world was, before Columbus discovered it. He only found that which waited for recognition. ‘The new world of being, higher and fairer than the world of sense, always has been, always will be. It waits for discovery. The way thither is in the within. The light which illumines it “lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” The key that unlocks the portal is God-likeness in idea. The power to step over the threshold is the feeling which accords with the idea.