Awakened

Qary L Stezvart

AWAKENED
ATTITUDE

Aw a ken ed
ATTITUDE
G a r y L S tew a rt

ORDER OF THE MILITIA CRUCIFERA EVANGELICA

 Gary L Stewart 1984-89. All rights reserved.

Published 1997 by
The O rder of the Militia Crucifera Evangelica
No part of this book may be used or
reproduced in any m anner whatsoever without
the written permission of the publisher.
For information on obtaining permission
for reprints and excerpts,
please contact:
OMCE
PO Box 226323
Dallas, TX 75222-6323
USA

Printed and bound in Singapore.

Contents
Foreword

vii

Introduction and Dedication

ix

Essays
The Quest to Know

A Prerequisite to Mysticism

Is Mysticism Logical?

The Infinite

13

Open-M indedness

17

Spiritual Attainm ent

22

Desire

26

The M ovement Toward Enlightenm ent

31

Determ ining Rosicrucian Affiliation

35

The Mission of the

Confraternity of the Rose Cross

40

vi

Contents

Laws of the Rose Cross

45

The Value of Tradition

50

Perspective:
The Im portance of Versatility

54

Do the Ends Justify the Means?

63

Legend

67

Concepts Regarding Reincarnation

71

O ur Purpose Is Service

76

How Do We Truly Serve?

79

Awakened Attitude

85

About the Author

88

Foreword

O n e of the most im portant keys to

the treasures of the Cosmic is an Awakened Attitude. Time and tim e
again this has been proved an essential truth. It is outside politics or
dogmatizing religion.
So m any leading individuals in the past, and in our present time,
became great because they had developed their ability to gain access
to the hidden wealth of the Creator by altering their perspective to
the environm ent as they experienced it: An awakened attitude.
One has only to read W ordsw orth's "Daffodils" to experience
something of the sheer w onder that he felt w hen he perceived that
great panoram a of vibrant life in nature's grand display. Blake is such
another and it is doubtful w hether anyone can sit in a concert hall
and rem ain unm oved by the singing of "Jerusalem." Another nam e
comes to m ind, Benjam in Franklin, He was one of the em inent
thinkers of his tim e and had a great influence on the developm ent of
the United States of America.
In our ow n tim e I feel that Dolores Ashcroft-Norwicki, Director
of Studies of th e Servants of th e Light h as an ex trao rd in arily
aw akened attitude and the gift of exhorting others to follow her
example. G areth Knight is another contem porary teacher w ho also
has the genius of training students to develop their inner potential.
My Wife, Elizabeth A nderton Fox, and colleague in the organisation
of Sirius, now also M agister Templi of the O.M.C.E. has the gift
and I have w itnessed m any exam ples of her brilliance w ith an
aw akened attitude. The list is long and the above are only a few of
the nam es that com e to m ind.

Finally, one of The Greats of our time is w ithout doubt G ary L

Stewart, Knight Com m ander of the O rder of the Militia Crucifera
Evangelica, and Sovereign G rand M aster of the British M artinist
Order, the author of this work. He has developed an aw akened
attitude to a very high degree. One has only to be in his com pany for
a short while to sense something of the magnificence of the Great
Inner Light, The Light of the Cosmic Mind. He is w ithout doubt an
excellent example of one w ith an aw akened attitude. I feel that this
work of his will becom e a treasure to m any and encourage them to
live by his example.
John AB Fox
Com m ander of Knights
UK Priory
OMCE

Introduction and Dedication

T h is series of essays was w ritten
between the years 1984 and 1989.1 think, at the time, some very crucial
points in several of the essays w ere entirely missed by m any readers.
However, one cannot be blam ed if a point w as missed because in
some ways, I suppose, my writing could be viewed as being unfair,
as I have purposefully never defined m y perspective in a clear and
distinct fashion. Subsequently, I am guilty, in a sense, of writing in
those parables" inherent w ithin those of mystical" propensity.
Yet, there is a reason for this. I very strongly believe that we are
here, m anifest upon this plane of existence, not only to discover, but
to create. In order to accom plish such objectives w e m ust first learn
to appreciate all of our resources. However, before w e can appreciate
them , w e m ust first know w hat they are. To discover w hat they m ay
be, it is essential to develop a particular perspectiveone that can
clearly see the obvious.
This sounds very simple and indeed is very simple, so w hy can't
w e see it that way? W hy is it that we, as hum an beings insist upon
taking that w hich is simple and turning it into something w hich is
impossible to understand?
As an illustration of w hat I m ean, I will refer to those people
w ho pursue the path of mysticism as well as those people w ho choose
a course of orthodox religious belief. The former, regardless of how
it is defined, ultim ately seek to experience "Cosmic Consciousness,"
the state of ultim ate enlightenm ent. Those people of the latter
category generally seek to know God. At least some do w hereas others
are content w ith faith. The key to understanding our problem s in
our respective quests has to do w ith our search, our desire, to attain

our goals. We only desire and subsequently seek that w hich w e have
convinced ourselves that we do not have.
First of all, w e would have to realize that before we could seek
something we would need to have an idea that that w hich we sought
actually existed. It is here that m any of the "mistakes" of the quest
are made. Often, the mystic w ould first begin to define enlighten
m ent and the religionist to define God. Suddenly, the task becomes
so m uch sim pleror so it is thought"We m erely have to attain that
w hich we have defined!"
No w onder there are so m any different religious beliefs or defini
tions of Cosmic Consciousness. W hat is worse in extrem e cases
consider w hat happens if someone actually attains their definition.
The rest of us w ho are still seeking are suddenly the recipients of a
barrage of "answers" w hich does little m ore than to confuse or cloud
the issue, especially if we have a propensity not to discrim inate or,
m ost importantly, not to rely upon ourselves for discovery of Truth.
The point is, that hum ans have a tendency to w ant to complicate
issues. I am rem inded of the logical proof of the existence of God
put forth by the medieval theologian and philosopher Saint Anselm.
According to his proof" in the Proslogion, God was defined as that
w hich nothing greater can be thought. W hat does that tell us? Not a
lot, but it certainly had people hopping around debating the issue
for a long time. In the process of debating, m any apparently forgot
w hat it was that they w ere seeking.
O ne of my m ost favorite and frequent quotes is by Benedict
Spinoza. As he writes at the conclusion of his book, The Ethics,
If the way which I have pointed out as leading to this result
seems exceedingly hard, it may nevertheless be discovered.
Needs must it be hard, since it is so seldom found. How would it
be possible, if salvation were ready to our hand, and could
without great labor be found, that it should be by almost all men
neglected? But all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare.
I think he makes a very good point. He observes an apparently
predom inant hum an attitude w hich causes us to concentrate our

efforts upon understanding and discovery of the complex. He also

points out that if our ultim ate concern, that being salvation, w ere so
readily and easily available to us, most people would neglect it and
seek it in a m ore exclusive fashion. Indeed, we know it exists. That is
w hy we look for it. However, do we actually seek it or our opinion
of it?
In our examples of God, salvation, or enlightenment, we somehow
have to accept their existenceunless we are of the nature of the
cynic w ho w ould begin arguing prior to em barking upon the quest.
So w hy do w e define that existence before understanding w hat it is?
It is my opinion that it is because w e are either uncertain of how to
proceed or that w e choose not to listen to the Silence and wait for
the inspiration of the process.
Teachers m ust know several things before teaching. First, they
m ust understand hum an nature in general; second, they m ust know
the nature of the individual w ho is to be taught; third, they m ust
realize that they, them selves, cannot teach but can only assist to
inspire the student to learn; and fourth, all knowledge of the Great Art
is simple and obvious and regardless of intelligence or education, it
can be m astered by all. To attain, we m ust learn to accept, not to take
and not to have, but to give. Simply accept that w hich is before us as
it is freely givenbut do not try to possess it.
I am very careful of my use of the word "obvious." In fact you will
very seldom see it in my writings or hear it in my speech. The reason
for this is that w hat m ay be obvious to m e may not be obvious to
som eone elseand vice versa. Subsequently, if the w ord is used
indiscriminately, it can offend others. However, it m ust be noted that
each elem ent of the q u estbe it for personal attainm ent or the
application of that attainm entis not only simple, but is obvious in
its simplicity. Perhaps that is w hy m any people w ho understand
hum an nature either choose to issue their "teachings" in a complic
ated m anner or in the form of parables. In the form er instance, it is
hoped that by proving a point utilizing the m ethods of those being
taught, they will suddenly realize that after all is said and done, it
was already simple to begin with. The latter instance is a m ethod

m ost com m only used by mystics to assist those involved in mystical

pursuits. Here, the attem pt is to invoke the intuitive process and to
inspire the reliance upon one's self for the answer. Perhaps, in such
an instance, w ithout understanding, the student perceives a puzzle.
But the "teacher" knows that w hen the puzzle is solved, the student"
forcefully understands that they attained as a result of their own
awakening. The only thing the "teacher" really did was to guide the
student to the proper attitude necessary to realize.
Indeed, it is only a m atter of how we choose to look at things.
Ultimately, w ho decides that? Such be the discovery.
Then, comes creation, or, our ability and responsibility to manifest
w hat we know. This is the real Work, the real Service needed in
mysticism. The mystic knows that they should only do that w hich is
needful and no m ore. The key to wisdom is learning the difference
betw een needs and wants.
Often, someone w ho is perceived to be a great mystic is expected
to perform dem onstrations or m iracles by those w ho adm ire or
denounce. In either case, is the perspective of the "Mystic respected?
Is there any need for such demonstrations? Or is it that both the
adm irer and cynic simply want to be convinced or entertained? Can
it be effectively argued that if one has the ability to heal, it is that
one individual's responsibility to heal all of the ills of the world?
Perhaps w ithout knowing it, the reports or dem ands of the adm irer
and cynic are indeed fulfilled. The true art of healing has to do w ith
the inspiring of learning. If we w ere given everything, w hat would
m otivate us to do anything other than to take?
As stated earlier, I have never really defined m y perspective. Not
that it is unique because anyone w ho w rites or com m unicates faces
the same situation, but it might be appropriate to attem pt to explain
it in order to illustrate the concept of need.
Having been in the position w here I w as expected to perform
"mystical demonstrations," and in fact have been asked on m ore than
one occasion to do so, in each instance I complied in the purest way
that I knew how. I simply was as I w asallowing life to be the illus
trator of the highest mystical principle conceivable by living things.

Sadly enough, the point w as m issed because som ething else was
expectedgenerally a desire to w itness a "supernatural" or psychic
feat of some sort. W hat can be more mystical than life itself? Or why
attem pt to prove the existence of God w hen all we have to do is to
look around us?
At o ther tim es I have been asked to dem onstrate a psychic
a b ility w hich it m ust be understood is distinct from m ystical
"ability." To this I usually comply by demonstrating telekinetic activity.
I simply raised my arm . Again, the point of the dem onstration was
usually missed. Consider that my physical body is a tem porary vehicle
of the "Essence." The m ind is a tool of that essence. In that the mind
and its process are intangible, w hereas the body is tangible, the result
of the m ind acting upon the body is telekinesis.
However, admittedly, I knew w hat was expected in these instances
and from that perspective I was guilty of avoiding the issue. Even
though m y point may have been missed, w as the message wasted?
I attem pt to govern m y life based upon the principle of needs in
the act of Service. It is not my particular purpose to pursue the
developm ent of psychic abilities, but for others, it m ay well be. It is
not m y place to offer an opinion in this regard. However, it should
be noted that it is im portant to be not only capable, but proficient in
effectively m anifesting in psychic realms. After all, is such not a part
of life? This realm, too, like mysticism, is m uch simpler than we make
it out to be. My only com m ent is that I have yet to discover any need
to dem onstrate the obvious.
Again, w hat is obvious? Recently in a private discussion w ith a
friend, I used the illustration that I could teach him to physically
touch a star. In the w orld of science, such a desire is great and whole
technologies are built around this subject, but for those w ho try keep
things simple, such ability is also simple. Does not the light w hich
originated from a star touch the retina of our eyes thereby allowing
us to see it? Have we not then touched a star? In illustrating this
example w ithin psychic realms, projection can be accom plished the
same way.
W hy is it that we perceive life to be so complicated? W hy is it

that our quest, being so simple and obvious, is m ade difficult by our
attitudes? Indeed, the enem ies of Light, of ourselves, and the source
of all fears are truly of our ow n making. W hy be proponents of the
"unmaking" w hen our purpose is to create?
I stated earlier that I purposefully have kept m y perspective
undefined. There are m any reasons w hy I did this. The Tradition to
w hich I belong emphasizes this technique so that discovery may be
appreciated. It has taken me ten years to appreciate the simple nature
of the Artm any tim es to m y "Teacher's" frustration I would think
and, an additional ten years to work with the Creative Forces of which
there is m uch yet to learn. M any aspects of that learning, of that
experience have been veiled in the essays w ritten betw een 1984 and
1989. To see them , one m ust w ork on the developm ent of a particular
attitude w ithin one's self w hich is the inspiration for the title of this
collection. Indeed, it is the purpose of our Quest.
To all those w ho are sincere, either m anifest or unmanifest, is
this book dedicated and given in Love.
GLS
San Jose, California
June 25, 1991

ESSAYS

The Quest to Know

A

proper definition of mysticism,

w hether it be from a standard created in today's world or that of
previous centuries, has always been elusive and vague. A technical
definition from the Oxford English Dictionary assists in such an opinion
w hen it states: "The opinions, m ental tendencies, or habits of thought
and feeling, characteristic of mystics; mystical doctrines or spirit;
belief in the possibility of union w ith the Divine nature by m eans of
ecstatic contemplation; reliance on spiritual intuition or exalted feeling
as the m eans of acquiring knowledge of m ysteries inaccessible to
intellectual apprehension." Subsequently, mysticism is often labeled
as the "irrational philosophy" in that it is thought that the intellect
cannot com prehend such enlightenm ent. Furthermore, the irrational
implies self-delusion and dream y confusion of thought.
It was not too m any years ago that "intellectual giants thought it
irrational to believe in gravity or a heliocentric conception of the
universe and, m ore recently, in plate-tectonics or a m yriad of other
currently rational existences. Even in our present day, there is m uch
debate am ong physicists as to w hether string theory offers science an
enlightened alternative to quantum m echanics. Simply, quantum
m echanics or particle physics bases its prem ise on a Newtonian
concept of the universe which assigns values to "points" in tim e and
space. String theorists ascribe a different value whereby the points"
actually become tiny "strings." In particle physics there is a quest to
unify three forces in nature. Unfortunately, there are four known
forces, and it is the string theorists who include gravity in their
unification attempts, as they are able to look at the universe from a
different and not-so-limited perspective.

The Quest to Know

However, our point is not to identify w ith the particulars of an

ever-changing intellectual comprehension of the universe or whatever
it is that is being sought, but rather w ith the act of seeking. And with
that act comes a different definition of mysticism; that being a term
applied to philosophical or scientific theories of w hich no rational
account can be given at the present time.
It is from a nonscientific contem porary com m unity that another
perspective of mysticism has developed. This com m unity is often
referred to as participants in the "New Age"an age of enlightenm ent
w here there is a transform ation of hum an consciousness w hereby
the utopian ideals will eventually m anifest. These are noble concepts
indeed. However, w e are m istaken if we think that they are new to
our era. Such goals have been the concern of hum anity for ages.
Yet, today, we m ay read books; attend lectures, sem inars, or
retreats; or practice a variety of disciplines* to attain enlightenm ent.
We m ay follow popular fads or believe popular beliefs, but what is
accomplished? Only w hat you doonly w hat you experience or w hat
you decide. To convince potential followers to practice their system,
m any offer prom ises of enlightenm ent or the developm ent of special
powers. Support for their cause is sometim es given by citing a super
natural source. This source often m anifests as a coming messiah, a
channeled entity, or a M aster personality of great attainm ent who
allegedly w orks through one person not perceived by anyone else
unless they have such great faith that they, too, share in the created
reality. Many define this as mysticism. Rosicrucians define it as fantasy.
So, then, w hat is mysticism? Is it the irrational philosophy? O r is
it a m ysterious, supernatural, or psychic belief?
W hat the scientist, the advocate of the New Age, the philosopher,
and the theologians regardless of their diverging beliefs share in
com m on is the quest to know w hat there is to be known. So, too, is
the objective of the m ystic. In fact, is it not tru e th at such a quest
is the objective of all hum an beings, in one m anner or another?
Subsequently, w hen we consider such disciplines as science, philosophy,
or mysticism, w e need to recognize them for w hat they are simply,
m ethodologies to obtain an objective.

Very few people in today's w orld would consider science to be

w eird or mysterious. However, mysticism is sometimes categorized
as such because it is often related to things psychic, occult, magical,
or supernatural. Often one brings to m ind images such as crystal
balls and fortune telling.
Yet, mysticism is none of that. It is simply an art of knowing.
M isconceptions develop from a m isunderstanding of the technique
and the mystical experience as described by those w ho have actually
had such an experience. The reason for this is that the mystical experi
ence is an experience of a transcending nature, and often the m ind
will enter a reality w here m ost people will not have the w ords to
describe the experience. As a result, it will be labeled as "irrational"
but not by the participant. The mystic w ould consider the experience
about as irrational as beauty or love, harm ony and peace.
T he art of m ysticism is the developm ent of a tec h n iq u e to
personally know the source of all Being. M any call this source God;
others, the Cosmic; m aybe some, the G rand Unified Theorythe
point being that the experience is noetic. We know, not think w e know
or develop a faith or belief, but w e know. Knowledge is rational.
The experience is even m ore beautiful because the potential for
knowing exists in all hum an beings. The experience of enlightenm ent
is not a nebulous som ething w hich is separate from the self. It is
present everywhere, and the process of enlightenm ent is nothing
m ore than an evolved realization.

A Prerequisite to Mysticism

W h e n the sincere student of mystical

philosophy has studied this subject for some time, he or she often
begins to realize that m any variables are associated w ith the philo
sophical aspects of mysticism. These variables are quite diversified
in their nature and can become intricate and involved w hen used to
explain a mystical state of consciousness. This can create frustration
for the student since one innately feels that mysticism itself is quite
simple. However, paradoxically, explanations of mysticism are intricate
in detail and often confusing to say the least. This point becomes
apparent w h en the student continually studies the subject from, let
us say, an intellectual perspective.
It is w idely recognized that mysticism is difficult to understand
on a philosophical basis. If one approaches the subject from a purely
em pirical and non-m ystical point of view, m ysticism is considered
to be vague at best, and incom prehensible at the least. If the subject
is approached by one w ho is inclined tow ard the sensational or
mysterious, mysticism can be elusive. It is this latter tendency which,
unfortunately, lends to the incom prehensibility of mysticism since
the subject is often conveyed in flowery and vague language that does
not adequately, and simply, express w hat is attem pted to be conveyed.
The understanding and expression of m ysticism should be as
simple as the actual state of realizing the mystical experience. A com
m on ground that most mystics agree upon is that the experience is the
ultim ate in simplicity. There is a definite clarity of knowing w ithout
doubts, and w ith that clarity comes a very simple understanding of a
very simple subject. The simplicity lies in the realization of a oneness

or of an all-pervading essence infusing all things. So, w hy is the under

standing and expression of the experience complex and confusing?
This question m ay be answ ered by analyzing and unifying two
avenues of approach. First, let us disregard any sensational and
m ysterious aspects of the subject by elim inating them as being
unproductive and, therefore, worthless. This will leave us w ith only
a serious and sincere attitude of inquiry.
W hat happens is that w hen the serious and sincere student has
studied mysticism for a period of time, he or she soon realizes that a
wide diversity of material m ust necessarily be reviewed and digested.
In other words, it becomes apparent that a complex philosophical
system has been developed. This system is an extension, or a result,
of our ow n thoughts that have evolved from m erely asking w hy and
wanting proof of how w e can be sure that w hat w e think is correct.
As our studies continue, we find ourselves asking m ore questions
due to the increasing am ount of knowledge acquired. This increased
know ledge then incites our thoughts to expand upon an analysis of
a com plex nature. W ith the analysis com es m ore intricacy and
complexity. At this point, if we are not careful, we can get caught up
in a never-ending circle w hich becomes m ore and m ore complex.
Second, we soon discover that if we want to persist in our studies,
patience m ust be developed. It becomes apparent that the deeper
we go into mystical studies, the m ore tim e is needed to assess our
acquisition of knowledge. Q uite frequently an obstacle is created
w hen w e im patiently begin to think that we w ant all the answ ers at
this very m om ent in time. At this point, w e have the option to
continue or to give up. Through the unification of the two points
that is, through the com bination of the complexity developed as a
result of our thought process, and the realization that persistence and
patience are required for coherencywe find that mysticism has
already taught us an im portant lesson: simply, that such a unification
is necessary.
After we gain such a realization, then, we discover that serious
and sincere students actually already had an innate propensity toward
mystical studies inherent w ithin their beings, and a conscious effort

to study has m erely brought this inclination to the surface. W hen

this happens, the student realizes that w hat was once thought to be
complex really is not, and w hen this point is understood, it is realized
as being quite simple. This may appear to be self-evident, but it is a
crucial point. This clarity of realization, som etim es called the "aha"
experience, is often intuitive in nature, not intellectual.
Invariably, at this time, the student will re-evaluate the complexities
that have been encountered and then attem pt to reorganize them
into a m ore simplified pattern. Perhaps the question is then asked:
W hat is the foundation from w hich my thoughts have evolved?"
Naturally, all students m ust answ er this question for them selves
simply because each individual m ust decide w hat is im portant and
to be included in the developm ent of their ow n personal philosophy.
As far as Rosicrucianism is concerned, we are a school that teaches
mysticism and our system has a simple and solid foundation. The
core of our understanding of mysticism lies in our ontology, or science
of being. W hen students of their ow n accord turn their attention to
this area, they are essentially beginning to ask them selves deep and
m eaningful questions. Essentially, they are asking questions and are
challenging the very core of mystical thought. The answ ers that they
find as a result of their ow n rational or mystical processes will deter
m ine their ow n particular approach and attitude toward attainm ent.
At this point, clarity of perspective is essential. That is, one m ust
be able to differentiate betw een one's own thoughts and aspirations
developed from w ithin and those of others acquired from discussion
and reading. Once w e can make this differentiation, we often discover
a natural attunem ent betw een ourselves and the essence of mystical
philosophy that results in a deeper com prehension than w e had
before. This attainm ent can be called mystical in nature, and our
perspective adjusts accordingly.
We then discover, w hen reflecting upon our developm ent, that
w e had begun our studies from the perspective that was most readily
accessible and com m on to us. That is, w e com m enced w ith an intel
lectual study of mysticism, a topic that we felt innately within us. As a
result, we developed a mystical philosophy which, by its ow n nature,

raised m ore questions than answ ers. We then found th at there

appeared to be a limit to our understanding based upon our m ethod
of approach. But if we persisted w ith sincerity, seriousness, and
patience, the innate qualities of our mystical philosophy became clear
and distinct, and if we thought about it, w e w ould discover that our
intuitive faculties had developed as a result of our efforts. This process
of intuition then becomes a major source of acquiring knowledge,
and it actually enables us to expand our realization capabilities beyond
the limitations of our intellectual thoughts.

Is Mysticism Logical?
O n e of the m any p o p u lar m is
conceptions concerning m ysticism claims that since the mystical
experience is an inner experience, it cannot be logical. That is,
mysticism is irrational and has no place in our "rational society. This
m eans that if an individual has a mystical experience, he or she would
be unable to understand that experience on an intellectual level and
would therefore be unable to communicate that experience to another
person. If true, w e could state that there is no logic to mysticism.
To fu rth er com pound ou r difficulties in understanding true
mysticism, our society has produced m any organizations that profess
to be m ystical schools and w hose leaders jum p on the platform
expounding a hodgepodge of alleged m ystical doctrines, thereby
creating w hat we may term a "mystical circus." It is here that m any
"seekers" go and pay to be entertained.
It is im perative that w e first realize that mysticism is simply a
doctrine that states that knowledge of the om nipotent Oneness may
be acquired through a direct experience. The mystical experience, then,
is an individual knowing of the Essence, Source, or God. As a result,
mysticism is concerned only w ith Ontology [the study of the nature
of Being). It does not deal w ith astral projection, telepathy, or any
other form of psychic experience. It m ust be clear that such psychic
experiences are m erely tools w hich m ay be used by an individual to
attain a mystical state of consciousness. In other words, there is a
distinct difference betw een mystical and psychic experiences.
The p ath that an individual m ay take to acquire a m ystical
understanding varies according to choice. It is not necessary that
one possess psychic abilities or have a high degree of intellectual

understanding. Each individual m ay choose a path that is in accord

ance w ith their personality, and depending upon the individual's
seriousness and sincerity of motive, he or she will be successful in
attaining the goal.
Let us consider this point by first illustrating a m ethodology
different from the Rosicrucian perspective, that is, a consideration of
the four major schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The goal of all four
schools is simply the enlightenm ent of all humanity. The path toward
attainm ent of that goal is twofoldthe Sutric and Tantric m ethods.
Each school will use one or the other, and sometim es both m ethods.
The Sutric m ethod is, generally, a study of the w ritten philosophy
and is essentially an intellectual system . On the other hand, the
Tantric m ethod is the path of experience, w here an inner wisdom is
cultivated and applied practically to our lives. The point that should
be considered is that both m ethods, if sincerely and responsibly
applied, can lead to attainm ent.
From a Rosicrucian perspective, we possess a system of study
which combines the two methods. O ur teachings are w ritten in m ono
graph form and are designed to be practically applied to our lives
through experience and knowing that w hat we are studying works.
However, we, as individuals, m ust apply w hat we read. Otherwise,
we are doing nothing m ore than wasting our time.
By illustrating the two perspectives, w e can see m uch similarity
in both m ethodologies used and results attained. However, the
system s vary in an im portant and subtle way. Rosicrucianism is a
W estern m ethod designed for the W estern tem peram ent, w hereas
T ibetan Buddhism is designed for the Eastern m ind. The Eastern
path, as exemplified by Tibetan Buddhism, is extremely difficult,
complex, and especially alien to the W estern tem peram ent. For the
Westerner, unless extreme precision and discrim ination is practiced
by the adherent, it is very easy to digress on a dangerous tangent
w ithout even realizing it. Such is further exemplified by the W estern
preoccupation w ith the sensational entertainm ent of "strange and far
away places"
On the other hand, the Rosicrucian path also presents its dangers

if one has a preoccupation w ith the sensational. However, since the

m ethodology is m ore fam iliar to the W estern w ay of thinking, we
are not as easily fooled by various tem ptations. Both "true'' schools
place an em phasis on a well-rounded understanding, but the depar
ture point on the Rosicrucian path em phasizes the developm ent of a
rational, objective logic of proof of the mystical .experience, and we
approach the ultim ate end by having this aspect ever apparent in
our lives. This is not to say that the Eastern path does not also do the
same, but since the tw o social and cultural structures are different,
there is a subtle difference as to w here the em phasis is placed.
To further elaborate on the "common definition of m ysticism, it
is stated that a mystical experience is the result of "vague" thinking.
In other words, there is no logic behind it. We are then led to believe
that mysticism is a deviation of the accepted norm and is, therefore,
unreliable as a source of knowledge. How untrue that statem ent is
to the mystic! The very foundation of the m ystical experience is in
kncwijig. There are no doubts and there is no deception. W hat is
perhaps irrational to the non-mystic is very rational to the mystic.
It is unfortunate that m any diverse schools of thought tend to
confine logic to a limited fram ework of communication. That is, logic
is a m eans of com m unicating an idea to others that can be object
ively understood. Naturally, such com m unication neces-sitates that
all parties concerned have a com m on denom inator that is related.
Does this necessarily m ean, then, that predicate calculus is illogical
if comm unicated to someone w ith a first-grade education? In the same
manner, is mysticism illogical if a mystical experience is related to
someone w ho has never had such an experience? Two brief examples
can, perhaps, illustrate this point.
Recently, in San Jose, California, a series of lectures was given by a
fundam entalist Christian who also happened to be a lawyer possessing
an excellent ability to apply logic to justify her contentions. The inten
tion of her lectures was to expose those individuals and organizations
w ho taught m ysticism as being w orkers and followers of Satan.
Naturally, Rosicrucianism and two or three other legitimate schools
w ere included in the attacks. So, too, were m any schools of "sensational

mystical fantasy," one in particular to w hich the lecturer confined

most of her com m ents and on w hich her logical argum ents w ere
built. After a basic premise was established, all mysticism w as lum ped
into one preconceived definition, and then logically tw isted to
conform to a specific purpose. Most of the attendees of the lecture
agreed w ith the basic premise, and therefore unequivocally accepted
the conclusions. However, those w ho knew otherwise easily saw the
fallacy in the logic.
On a m ore positive note, in our second example, we can ask if
love is logical. If two people experience love, then indeed a system
of logic is com m unicated and understood. But, if a person w ho felt
love tried to explain love to an individual w ho had never experienced
it, that person lacking the experience could argue that love was
illogical and irrational.
W hen w e understand the relative values of logic and realize that
logic itself is a tool of comm unicating knowledge, then we can easily
see that there is a logic to mysticism and that it is rational since the
very path of mysticism is the path of knowing.

The Infinite
I f w e w ere to consolidate the
essence of m ystical philosophy into one specific point w hich all
students of mysticism could use as a foundation for gaining under
standing, w hat w ould it be? Could it possibly be the steps required
to develop psychically? Or, a system atic overview of the thought
process? O r ... ad infinitum?
That is precisely the point w hen w e say "ad infinitum." Can we
truly say that there is, indeed, one essential foundation from w hich
all students m ust begin? If w e did, there would always be someone
w ho w ould disagree, prim arily because each individual has a unique
perspective based upon their own experiences and w hat is im portant
to one is irrelevant to the other. We on the Rosierucian Path cannot
precisely say that w e teach but, rather, that we assist one to learn for
oneself. We are quite cognizant of the fact that all learning m ust
necessarily come from w ithin each individual student and, therefore,
cannot be ascertained by the student from w ithout. Any school of
thought or philosophy, any definition of terms, m ust be individually
interpreted by the student and applied to life in his own unique way.
O nly then can true learning take place.
Regardless of w hat is understood by the student or how he or
she interprets a thought, there do exist certain subjects that the
student m ust consider. Rosicrucianism often delves into subjects that
can be relegated to the category of "mystical speculation," but
regardless of w hether they are m ere speculations or not, at some point
in time the student m ust arrive at an interpretation of them so as to
continue to acquire a m ore com plete understanding. Essentially, the
true" understanding m ust supersede the intellectual. That is, it m ust

be developed from the innate qualities w ithin one's being. It may be

"sparked" from w ithout, but it m ust be understood from w ithin.
One such subject that each student eventually tries to come to
term s w ith is infinity. Simply defined, infinity is that which is w ithout
beginning or end. That, in itself, is easy enough to com prehend, but
how m any of us have asked ourselves, "But w here did it all start?"
At the sam e time, m any of us are looking for the absolute truth or
the final realization. Before we can answ er such questions, w e need
to come to some realization as to the nature of that w hich is infinite.
There are several ways to approach the subject, the most common
being from a linear perspective. That is from a perspective that is
really intellectual in nature. As an example of this, everyone w ho
has studied m athem atics is aware that betw een two points on a line
segment there exists an "infinite" num ber of additional points. We can
conceive of a situation w here such an existence is possible because
we can visualize that betw een two points, there can always exist a
m iddle point betw een the two. To illustrate this contention, if w e
refer to the paradoxes of the ancient Greek philosopher Zeno, we will
find one or two examples that m ay give us a very good explanation
of an extremely profound concept.
First, Zeno illustrates a race in w hich one of the participants is
given a head start. He then asks the question, "Who will w in the race?"
Zeno concludes, essentially, that neither participant could logically
w in because for the second person to catch up with the other, he would
first have to travel half the distance. But, before he could travel half
the distance, he would also have to travel half that distance a situation
w hich conceivably necessitates an infinite process w here neither par
ticipant could noticeably move, let alone w in a race. This notion, Zeno
concludes, is absurd because in actuality people w in and lose races.
In another of Zeno's paradoxes, he cites an example of a person
shooting an arrow in the air. He points out that at any given m om ent
in time, the arrow cannot possibly move. Again, he concludes, this
notion is absurd.
The implication that Zeno is making in the above illustrations is
that our notions of w hat we perceive to be the nature of that w hich

The Quest to Know

15

is infinite, and that w hich constitutes tim e and space, are actually
m uch m ore than w hat is norm ally intellectually perceived. And,
indeed, there is certainly the implication that w hat constitutes our
reality is only a limited expression of an understanding of w hat really
exists that is limited by our perspective of how we observe the world.
Since the tim e of Zeno, the history of science and philosophy
has been essentially limited to the linear perspective of infinity. It w as
not until the evolution of m athem atics allowed for such great minds,
as exemplified by Albert Einstein, to evolve a different perspective
of reality, that the ontological concerns of mysticism really began to
be understood. Naturally, the theory of relativity brought a different
perspective to how hum anity viewed our world.
As an example, within the past ten years, a revolutionary new theory
called "Super-Gravity" challenges our concept of linear infinity. Very
simply, this theory calls for a unification of the laws of gravity in which
seemingly two distinctive laws are unified into one. The implication
here is th at there exists a unifying factor in the universe that,
mystically, can be described as an all-pervading Oneness. However,
this "new" theory also calls for the subdivision of subatomic particles,
such as neutrons, photons, muons, gluons, so-ons and so-ons ... w hich
is essentially a return to the "linear" m anner of thinking.
The point of the m atter is that we recognize the existence of
something that is understood to be "beyond" our comprehension, yet
w e attem pt to describe it by utilizing our accepted standards of defini
tion. As a result, we often run into m any paradoxes and contradictions
that are really unnecessary.
Mystical philosophy, on the other hand, allows for new" inter
pretations of the old" scientific and philosophical contentions in that
we try not to lim it our m ethod of thinking. Instead, w e incorporate
a change of attitude and perspective into our belief system. In other
words, we exam ine all possible angles to any given problem and
incorporate such hum an attributes as intuition and insight into our
system of study.
If we apply the methodology or logic that results from mysticism,
we can view and understand the subject of infinity in a different light.

Instead of considering it from a linear or quantative expression, let us

view it from a qualitative angle in w hich the quantitative interpretation
of that w hich is infinite m erely becomes a "part" of the greater whole.
In other words, the all-pervading essence referred to in mystical
writings is not described or defined as being infinite in nature, but is
thought to be the source of that w hich is infinite.
In the attem pt to make this difficult concept easier to understand,
if w e look at tim e from the perspective of past, present, and future;
w e have a quantitative expression. Mystical philosophy states that
there is really no past or future, but, rather, that everything occurs in
the present, existing in the "now. If we go one step beyond that and
say that there is no present either, w e immediately ascribe to existence
a qualitative state of being that transcends the com m on notion of
infinity, time, and space. Such attributes then become a part of the
whole rather than a description of the whole.
We can m ultiply infinity by two and arrive at the answ er of
infinity. However, if we divide any given num ber in infinity by itself,
our answ er will be one. Or, if we divide infinity by two, w hat do we
have? Perhaps a subtle indication of an unbounded, unlimited quality
that cannot be defined by the term "infinity.

Open-Mindedness
T hroughout history, the advocation
of free thought has been a major issue and concern of all societies.
Essentially, the advocates of free thought hold the position that w hat
we think, how w e think, and the m anner by w hich such thoughts
are expressed should be open and unrestricted. It is this last point
concerning the expression of our thoughts that is the real issue. If we
think about it, we realize that our thoughts are, m ore or less, private
and cannot be controlled or m anipulated by o thersor can they?
The opponents of free thinking generally hold that the position
that all thoughts be brought into the open and p ut forth to society
as propositions or actions that should be adhered to, or at least
considered by all people, should not be allowed since the results could
be detrim ental to the society in w hich they live. As an example, if an
individual is allowed to develop a philosophy that is based upon
negative and d etrim ental thoughts, and subsequently is able to
convince others to adhere to such a philosophy, would such allowance
be beneficial or d e trim e n ta l to society? In o th er w ords, if the
allowance of "free" thought produces terrorism , genocide, or other
destructive acts, does free thought become good or bad?
It is apparent that this is not an easy m atter to resolve, since many
instances are not so extrem e as the example, and no am ount of
philosophical debate as to defining "good" or bad" will find a solution.
Such a solution, on the other hand, necessarily m ust be found w ithin
each individual to make a determ ination of the m an-m ade values of
good and evil. It then becomes each individual's responsibility to
ensure that he or she has the responsibility, education, and purity of
m otive to m ake such a determ ination.

From the perspective of Rosicrucian philosophy and applied

esotericism, we intend to evaluate this subject based upon the prem ise
that our readers (who are categorized as thinkers in the fields of m ysti
cism, philosophy, and hum anitarian ideals) are already familiar with,
at least, the basics of such a topic. It is, therefore, assum ed that all
the necessary prerequisites for the advocation of free thought are
understood and applied to our lives. Undoubtedly, we all strive for
purity of motive and altruistic values in our actions.
Assuming that w e all have these attributes, w e m ay ask the
question: "Will society allow us to bequeath the results of our thinking
to others?" It will probably be agreed upon by everyone that if our
thoughts are in accordance w ith and in support of the prevalent
governm ent of any society, then we would be free to do as we please.
But w hat happens w hen such thoughts are viewed by the majority
as being damaging to the safety and welfare of society regardless of
w hether they are or not?
As an illustration of this point, some religions, particularly the
new fun d am en talism th at is now p rev alen t in the West, quite
frequently state that if w e keep an open m ind, w e w ould do nothing
more than let the devil in. Does not this rem ind us of the reason
w hy the revolution of ideas came about in the 17th century? Does
not this type of thinking take us back to the M iddle Ages w here
religion kept the masses of people under direct control? W hat are
w e doing now w ith these same attitudes? Have w e not evolved, just
a little, in the past several hundred years?
In past centuries, it was realized by political and religious powers
that if people w ere allowed to question authority or ask questions
that w ould result in each individual's education, then a challenge
w ould be m ade to the authority of those in control. The solution was
quite simple th en the controlling faction m erely needed to make a
statem ent that if you do not believe w hat we tell you, then you will
be condem ned to eternal dam nation. Since w ealth and religion held
a m onopoly on education, the ignorant masses had no choice but to
accept the validity of such statements.
Fortunately, this system w as not allowed to perpetuate itself

indefinitely. The negativeness and faults of ignorance soon becam e

ap p a re n t w h e n those enlightened individuals w h o realized the
im m aturity of such thinking expressed their views although they
knew th at they w ere taking the chance that their life spans could
be considerably shortened. But, knowledge does a rem arkable thing.
The self-evidence of truth finds m any adherents, and w hen m any
people begin to manifest a belief, then a real and im portant challenge
is put forth to the existing system.
Two things begin to happen at this point. First, the pow ers that
be m ust necessarily modify their position to adapt to the new influx
of ideas. And second, the developm ent of the new system and the
affiliation of m any new a d h e re n ts som etim es necessitates that
the new structure m ust have specific guidelines. In m ore instances
than not, this new structure necessarily develops a restrictive dogma
if the new leaders are to rem ain in control or if the new m ovem ent
is to continue in its existence.
As a result, a little bit of knowledge is introduced into the old
system and a lot of closed-mindedness is developed in the new. If the
new system gains a considerable degree of power, then it m ay replace
the old system , but at this point we ask, "With what?" We must keep
in m ind that considerable care m ust be taken to ensure that our
initial purity of motive is strongly incorporated into our developing
structure so as to be the prim ary motivation behind it. Again, the issue
of collective standards is returned to the individual for consideration.
Let us now assum e that this essential p u rity of m otive is
recognized and becom es our prim ary m otivating factor. O ur true
ideal and utopian goal is purely a perpetuation and dissem ination
of Truth. We know that we may be confronted, but we also realize
that the confrontation will be against our manifesting good thoughts
and not w ith the actual act of thinking them. No one can control such
thoughtsor can they?
An illustration of this idea is not unlike our Rosicrucian approach
to disease. We are not so m uch concerned w ith the sym ptom s as w e
are w ith the cause: This is as m uch true w ith the freedom of thought.
If one intends to underm ine the symptoms, one m ust go to the cause

of those symptoms, and in this instance, it would be to influence

w hat w e think. Therefore, the control and influence of our thoughts,
if they are to occur, m ust be approached at the source.
We all believe that we have the freedom to think as we choose.
In most instances, we also recognize the freedom to m anifest our
thoughts as we choose. We pride ourselves in the fact that we can
have an open mind, and since the majority supports us in our beliefs,
w e really do not have to give the subject m uch thought. However,
are w e not closing our m inds w hen we do not exercise a continuation
of thought on the subject? Are we not supported and influenced by
those w ho agree w ith us and w ho also close their minds?
W ith the freedom to choose it is often found that we choose to
be open-m inded about one subject but closed-minded concerning
another. As an example of this point, consider our religious beliefs,
w hich are very sacred to us. For the most part, the sacredness of our
belief is generally defined into a coherent system that is acceptable
to ourself. However, if this belief is challenged by a thought or
idea that is in contradiction to our belief, do we think about it and
incorporate it, or do we dismiss it as being irrelevant and perhaps
dangerous? If the form er is true, then w e can say that w e have an
open mind. But, if the latter situation is prevalent, then our m inds
are closed. Given the basic prem ise th at w e are essentially free
thinkers, how can w e justify the latter condition if we discrim inate
betw een that w hich is sacred and not to be questioned, and that
w hich is not sacred to us and is, therefore, safe to be questioned?
Perhaps all of us w ould agree that this point is self-evident
because w e can see the beliefs and attitudes of other individuals
around us w ho exhibit this distinction. But, w hat if someone w hom
you respect w ere to say to you that there was no truth or validity to
your life? W hat w ould you feel? Would you be outraged? Or, w ould
you w onder w hat point w as about to be made? Or, is there some
part deep w ithin you asking the question that perhaps such a state
m ent is true?
If you are asking yourself the latter two questions, then one of
two things becomes apparent. First, you are truly open-m inded in

your approach; or second, you truly believe w hat has just been said,
w hich m ay or m ay not m ake you an open-m inded individual.
On the other hand, if you are outraged, then again, one of two
things w ould be exhibited. First, your belief is quite sacred to you,
and as you accept it on faith, it cannot be questioned. If so, you should
seriously ask yourself w hether your m ind is of an open or closed
nature. Second, such questions may have no relevance to the subject
of open- or closed-m indedness because you m ay have already
dem onstrated to yourself, through inner experience or illumination,
that w hat you believe is indeed true and correct. Regardless of the
instance, the final estim ation of your inner evaluation lies w ithin
yourself. You m ust decide w hich attribute you m aintain.
However, the real point being m ade is that for the sake of our
understanding, and for the sake of the perpetuation of Truth for the
benefit of all humanity, we m ust ask these questions. We m ust ask
these questions because w e m ust know, not m erely believe, that
w hat we are doing by w ay of Work and Service is in accordance
w ith the Truth that w e have all chosen to serve and perpetuate.
If we are to be true to ourselves, if w e are to truly represent the
mystical essence, w e m ust have the facts, and w e m ust know without
doubt that w e are doing the correct thing. The only w ay that we can
be certain of this is to ask questions and m aintain an open-m inded
and free-thinking attitude.
O ur w ork is too im portant to allow the m ediocrity of acceptance
by blind faith and m ere action w ithout substance to manifest. If we
have faith because we are still in the process of trying to learn, let
it be reasoned and responsible faith. This attitude is fundam ental
to Rosicrucianism . Not only are w e to question those things around
us, but w e m ust treat our questions in a m anner that does not
discrim inate against the very foundation of our own personal belief.
If we can truly challenge ourselves and our beliefs, and are not afraid
to change and grow w hen we realize that we are wrong or admit to
our ignorance, th en we can truly say that we have an open mind.

Spiritual Attainment
Frequently, w e hear the statem ent
that psychic development is indicative of attainment. And, quite often,
w hen people attem pt to evaluate their personal developm ent, they
often look to the "unfamiliar" aspects of their beings as an indication
of w here they stand in relation to spiritual evolution. That is, those
aspects of their beings w ith w hich they are familiar are generally
taken for granted as being a com m on p art of them selves and that
there is really nothing very special about them.
O n the other hand, m ost sincere students of mystical studies
know that there are certain aspects of our beings of w hich most
people are not normally aware. Such aspects include psychic abilities,
aw areness of mystical experiences, frequent application of intuitive
im pressions to our lives, and so on. As a result, w e often look to the
u nfam iliar aspects" and assess our attainm ent based upon the
frequency of such experiences.
Suppose, for example, that there is some doubt in our m inds as
to w hether we have experienced these "unfamiliar'' aspects. W hat do
w e then think about ourselves? Do w e think that we are not highly
evolved because these experiences are seem ingly non-existent or
few and far betw een? Do we then desire to have such experiences
so that we m ay become m ore highly evolved? But, let us suppose
that w e frequently have conscious awareness of psychic, mystical,
and intuitive experiences or o ther types of abilities th at we, as
m ystical students, know exist. Do w e th en reach a pinnacle of
attainm ent in w hich we know that w e have attained? Or, do such
experiences becom e so m uch a part of ourselves that they too,
become com m on and we, in turn, begin searching for ever "higher"
experiences to w hich our desires take us?

Spiritual Attainment

23

If so, do w e not have the sam e attitude of m ind that w e had

before experiencing the unfam iliar? And, if this is true, w hat real
difference is there betw een the form er and the latter?
R osicrucianism is m ystically p an th eistic in its outlook. We
recognize an all-pervading O neness that is inherent in all things.
Nothing can be separate or distinct from this Oneness and, as a result,
we all have the ultim ate in attainm ent inherent w ithin our beings
and it m erely becomes a m atter of realizing this, usually by way of
m ystical illum ination.
W ith these thoughts in m ind, we can define attainm ent not
in the linear sense as a goal to be achieved by any of our desires,
but rather as an already existing state inherent w ithin ourselves.
Attainm ent is not in the desire; it is in w hat we are! W hat is often
m istaken as attainm ent is really our conscious awareness, and it is
usually the developm ent of our conscious aw areness to w hich m ost
of our energies are directed. Naturally, one of the goals of our
teachings is to increase our aw areness so that we may better under
stand and apply the principles learned to our lives. However, it is
best th at we realize th at a subtle distinction exists b etw een w hat
is know n consciously and how far we have attained.
As an illustration of this point, we should realize that there is a
distinct difference betw een psychic and mystical experiences. One of
the most im portant distinctions is that a mystical experience is noetic.
That is there would be absolutely no doubt in our m ind that w e had
the experience, and such an experience w ould result in the influx
of knowledge into our lives. On the other hand, a psychic experience
m ay be just that, or we m ay confuse a fantasy or some other form of
self-deception as being psychic in nature.
The point is that we do not always know if a particular experience
is psychic or if it is of some other quality. But, let us suppose that we
do indeed have a qualified psychic experience, as m any of us do.
However, since there can exist an elem ent of doubt accom panying
such as experience, how are we to determ ine its quality? In other
words, if the experience is not noetic, is the frequency of occurrence
of such an experience indicative of any degree of attainm ent?

To further illustrate this point, how m any tim es have w e experi

enced seeing a flash of blue o r violet light so m ew h ere w ith in
ou r range of vision? Or, p e rh a p s a "tingling" sen satio n along the
spine or head? Such sensations can be psychic experiences and we
should realize that often such physical sensations accom pany these
experiences.
However, w hat value does that type of experience have to us?
Moreover, w hat do we do after experiencing such sensations?
We can dism iss them as being unim portant. Perhaps we run to
the doctor or psychiatrist thinking that we are having a psychic
experience. If so, w hat do w e think?
Some people may jum p to the conclusion that since their experi
ence is "psychic" they have finally attained a high" state of spiritual
evolution, and that the tiny dots of light are representative of profound
spiritual contact. On the other hand, others will perhaps understand
that those dots of light m erely indicate that a particular psychic center
is beginning to awaken and that their realization of the im pressions
is nothing m ore than a routine function of one aspect of them selves
not unlike any other function. Who then has a "more evolved degree
of attainm ent?
The point to rem em ber is that it is not the psychic experience
that gives us an indication of our development, but, m ore im port
antly, it is our attitude and understanding toward such experiences
w hich reveal to us our attainm ent. The teachings of Rosicrucianism
elaborate upon this point fully in the example of psychic projection.
We understand that w hen w e are in an unconscious state, such as in
sleep, in a coma, or in a state of intoxication, we m ay unintentionally
project, and quite often do so.
Let us suppose that, in our period of attunem ent, we contact a
personality that is projecting. Are we to then assum e that because
a contact is made, we have reached a high degree of attainm ent
and, therefore, the personality that we contacted has an im portant
message of enlightenm ent w hich we m ust give to the world? We
should seriously think about the experience before taking any drastic
m easures because we do not necessarily have any idea as to w hat

Spiritual Attainment

25

was contacted. This, in itself, is quite serious. M any of the books on

the m arket today w hich are concerned w ith such messages from
Cosmic M asters are the result of people m isunderstanding their
experiences. So, too, are some of the self-proclaimed messengers of the
Cosmic Hierarchy. W hat level have these people attained? W hat are
they really doing for the dissem ination of TYuth?
An im portant point implied regarding the frequency of psychic
and mystical experiences w hile in a subconscious state needs elab
oration. The vast majority of us frequently have experiences while
asleep. Further, we m ay only rem em ber a small percentage of those
experiences w h en w e awaken. W hat is extrem ely im portant here
is that we do have these experiences and that they are em bedded
w ithin us. Further, they are quite applicable and im portant to our
livesbut, w e m ay not have objective consciousness of these experi
ences sim ply because there is no reason for it. But, if the need arises,
the aw areness will be there. Just think of how many tim es we have
aw akened in the m orning w ith the feeling that som ething special
had happened w hile asleep, or, perhaps we w ake up w ith a clear
perception of a situation which, the night before, was obscure. We may
not rem em ber the experience that we have passed through, but it
has been applied, for a purpose, to our lives.
Spiritual attainm ent is quite similar. It is one's point on the Path
of mystical awakening. It is not assessed by the frequency of psychic
or mystical contacts, but, rather, by our attitude to ourself and others,
and is m easured by our dedication to Truth and our sincerity of effort.
If we m anifest a degree of interest and intent in the sensational,
perhaps we should then reassess our personal values and goals.

Desire
I f you w ere asked the question,
"W hat is the m ost im portant goal in your life?" how w ould you
respond? Such a question is quite common, and if w e think back
over our Lives, we m ay recall that this question has occurred to us
often. But let us also ask ourselves if w e have truly considered the
question's implications to their fullest extent. That is, have we called
upon our deepest resources, our inner convictions, and even our
thoughts and aspirations that have evolved from illum ination?
Naturally, each of us considers m any different types of goals on
a day-to-day basis. Some goals are of an im m ediate nature, w here
their attainm ent is usually acquired quickly and simply. As an illus
tration of this, w e m ay decide that for this evening's dinner, w e would
like to have a special dish that is not norm ally a part of our m enu.
To attain that goal, we first need to decide exactly w hat dish we would
like to prepare, and then go out to find a store w here the ingredients
may be bought. The uniqueness of this dish determ ines the difficulty
that we m ust go through to find these ingredients. In this illustration,
w e m ay note how our reasoning process consists of, first, a decision;
second, a determ ination of how and w here the necessary ingredients
can be found; third, the action necessary to acquire those ingredients;
and fourth, the preparation necessary to produce the final result.
This sim ple illustration dem onstrates a step-by-step process by
w hich a goal is reached. As simple as it m ay be, a profound factor
should be noticedthat is, the process by w hich it was necessary to
m anifest the desired result. W hat is extrem ely im portant in this
instance is not necessarily the desire or the goal that is to be reached,
but the methodology utilized to produce the result.

Let us expand upon this thought for a m om ent. Such a simple

goal and its accom plishm ent is practiced m any tim es daily by each
one of us. Little thought is put into the attainm ent, and in most cases,
the process becomes an autom atic action, so that it is unnecessary to
put m uch thought behind it. But, let us suppose that the goal w hich
w e w ant to reach is of a m ore complex and difficult nature. Let us
say that w e decide that w e w ant to purchase an expensive car that
w e know is beyond our means. The initial idea becom es m anifest
w ithin our minds, and w ith continued visualization, it soon becomes
a goal w hich w e w ould like to reach.
As this idea develops m ore thoroughly and w ith continued and
m ore intricate visualization, w e soon reach a point in w h ich a
decision m u st be m ade. E ither w e dism iss the thought as being
impractical and, therefore, forget all about it, or w e decide that w e
will attem pt to reach our goal. It is because of the degree of difficulty
in attaining the goal that the process, or methodology, m ust neces
sarily becom e m ore involved. The obstacles need to be overcome,
and in the case of the given example, the m ost im portant obstacle
is of a financial nature. C ontinued visualization, persistence, and
desire result in the final realization that to achieve the goal, w e must,
perhaps, take on another job, or find some other m eans by w hich to
increase our income.
The above tw o simple examples illustrate two rather m undane
and, perhaps, easily acquired results. The reasoning process is not
involved and, frankly, is quite simple. That is, w e did not have any
difficulty in reasoning out w hat m ust be done to achieve the results,
nor did we have to use, to any great depth, our inner resources.
However, betw een the two examples, w e should note one im portant
similarity. T he process utilized in both instances w as identical. We
w ere able to overcome different types of obstacles by varying the
degree by w hich w e thought.
There is nothing unique about this process of attaining goals, and
it is something that all of us do m any tim es a day. But w hat about
other goals w hich are of a m ore abstract and ideological nature?
Students of mysticism usually have goals of an entirely different nature

in addition to the m ore m undane ones. M any individuals w ho are

mystically inclined have a goal of Cosmic Illumination. For those of
you w ho have such a goal, we will ask: How m any of you have
reached it? If you haven't reached that goal, is it because you haven't
tried? Or, is it because you haven't found that ever-elusive key w hich
represents the proper sequence of the process or m ethodology that
needs to be utilized?
It has often been said that if one sets a goal that is so abstract,
so vague in its nature that no know n way for its attainm ent can be
found, it will cause eventual frustration for the person w ho origin
ally set that goal. The question may then be asked, should w e only
set goals that we know we can reach, or should w e set seemingly
unattainable goals and th en face the consequences of frustration
and doubts of our own abilities if we do not attain them ? This, natur
ally, is an individual decision that m ust be m ade based upon one's
ow n personality.
However, we should all be aw are that it is not the goal that
seemingly cannot be reached, but it is the process needed to achieve
that goal w hich is the cause of our frustrations. If we only realize
this im portant and subtle distinction, w e can approach the subject
from an entirely new and different perspective. O ur failures, then,
are not the result of our inability to attain the goal, but are m erely
a difficulty in either reasoning out the process, or our tem porary
failure to feel the proper course of action to be taken. W hen it is realized
that, essentially, the process for all attainm ent is the same in its struc
ture, w e can find the key, the solution, in the very familiar process of
our daily decision making. Just because the goal is abstract does not
necessarily m ean that its attainm ent is also of an abstract nature.
Once this point is realized, we can find two easily understandable
solutions to our problem. The first key is found w ithin the framework
of the very basics, the very core of Rosicrucian teachings. This involves
a sense of oneness w ithout distinction or separation. Simply, it is the
feeling that the Cosmic infuses all things, and all things are an integral
part of the One Essence. It is quite evident that the real essence
behind our teachings is evolved from w hat w e term mystical pantheism;

that is, that we are a part of the O neness and can attain a direct
knowledge of that Essence and thereby be attuned to it.
But, w e m ust think about this concept. We m ust not ju st accept
it as a philosophical belief but feel it, live it, know it! We m ust
discover this tru th for ourselves. We need to analyze all possible
ram ifications of th e varying beliefs th at accom pany this p hilo
sophy, and at the same time, keep that goal of mystical illum ination
w hich w e m ay have in m ind. With understanding from the head,
the intellect, w e will soon find that this understanding is transferred
to the heart, or indoctrinated deeply into our inner beings. If w e
then stop to analyze w hat has transpired, w e will soon find that a
new attitude has evolved w hich gives us an entirely new perspective
of our lives, our goals, and our relationship to all that exists.
The second key, or solution, involved w ith the process used to
attain our goals w e can call desire.
Let us approach this concept based only upon the w ord and its
implications in relation to a particular goal of Cosmic Illumination.
The nature of a desire viewed only from an analytical and mechanistic
perspective can create m ore problem s than solutions. From this
perspective, if w e say to ourselves that w e desire a new car, w hat w e
are really saying is that we want a new car. The goal to be reached is
the car. The desire is m erely a want; it is telling us that since w e do
not have a car, we w ould like to have one.
Consider the next question very seriously: Is the desire, or want,
necessary to attain the goal? Is it really an integral part of the process
by w hich w e attain? By stating that we desire or w ant the car, we
are really telling ourselves that we do not have it. Isn't that already
known? Isnt it already understood? W hy is it necessary to reaffirm
to ourselves that w hich is self-evident?
Instead of saying that we w ant the car, w ouldn't it be better to
ask if we really need the car? An attitude based upon need, rather
than w ant usually produces a slightly different perspective in our
attitudes w hich is usually felt to be m ore harm onious in nature.
Perhaps this will assist in attaining our goals by m aking them easier
to realize.

W hat about Cosmic Illumination? If w e desire Cosmic Illumination,

w hat are we really telling ourselves? Are we not saying that because
we w ant to achieve it as a goal, we do not have it? In other words,
through the desire of attainm ent, w e are adm itting to ourselves that
it is not already attained.
Let us now consider the two solutions in respect to each other.
O ne of the criticism s of the nature of Oneness w ithout distinctions
or separateness is that since all things are identical, such hum an
a ttrib u tes as w ants, desires, o r essentially, an y action, becom e
irrelevant. That is, a seemingly fatalistic outcom e results from w hat
appears to be an elimination of such previously m entioned hum an
attributes as desires and wants. W hy do anything if desire becomes
non-existent? We can counter such a criticism by asking: W hy m ust
w e confine ourselves or limit our actions to essentially unnecessary
and deceptive attributes?
It m ust be adm itted, however, that this type of thinking can be
critical to our welfare and attainm ent if the attitude that necessarily
evolves from a thorough understanding is not had. It is because the
nature of the Cosmic is not dependent upon hum an reason or action
that it is absolutely im perative that w e view the universe from its
perspective rath er than from any illusions of our own. Since desire
for Cosmic Illum ination tells us that we do not yet have it, and the
very foundation of Rosicrucian teachings tells us that w e are identical
to all that is, are we not defeating our purpose, our goal, by dwelling
in contradiction? Perhaps the second solution, the second key we
call desire, is truly found by its elimination.
Once this point is realized, once this point is ingrained into our
hearts, into our inner beings, have we not realized that w e already
have attained that w hich we desire? Have w e not really had it all
this time? There are not necessarily any "fireworks" involved in this
realization, nor are there any strange and mysterious happenings to
our being w hen this realization suddenly occurs. There is m erely a
profound and actively deep understanding or knowing.

The Movement
Toward Enlightenment
I have said and w ritten the following
m any times: "The ends do not justify the means. It is not the goal
that m ust be reached; it is the process that m ust be followed. The
goal is m erely a result. The process is the act w hich creates the goal,"
In mysticism, purity is essential, clear direction a must, and selfless
ness is the act. Anything less is unw orthy of our Order. Anything
less degrades humanity.
The intent of this article is to attem pt to share w ith you the
essence of Rosicrucianism and our direction. To touch this, however,
one m ust know, not believe; and one m ust feel from the heart, not
think from the brain.
O ur beloved O rder is m uch m ore than a school of mysticism
dissem inating teachings. It is an initiatic O rder of mysticism in the
Rosicrucian tradition. W hat does this mean? It m eans that w e serve
Light, flow w ith Light, and share w hat we are. We m ust realize that
we are not following the course of ordinary hum an standards, but
rather those standards of an esoteric and spiritual creation. If we can
only understand this simple statem ent, its implications are profound.
The statem ent as well as the implications can be w ritten in words,
but the m eaning must be read from the heart. M editate upon and be
illum ined by this. W hen realized, nothing m ore need be said.
O ur O rder teaches students in the hopes that a few will arrive at
a realization. In past years and centuries the O rder has gone through
phases that w ere w ithout enlightened individuals. We have called
these phases "inactive" or "dorm ant cycles of the Order. But do not
m isunderstand this. It does not m ean that the O rder was perpetuated
by unenlightened people. It means, rather, that the O rder had no
physical vehicle by w hich to express itself.

Historically, there have been m ore times w ithout the O rder than
there have been w ith it. Traditionally, there has never been a tim e
that we w ere w ithout the O rder because its essence has always
m anifested in an "intangible" esoteric creation, m erely waiting to be
touched by the hearts of those who truly aspire. W hen there is at least
one such individual, then the O rder manifests on a physical plane.
Nevertheless, the Order is never without life and function. It is never
inactive: only hum an perspective makes it appear so. The Path by which
to touch the O rder is simple. It is by initiation. We leam through service.
We, as hum an beings (for never forget that we are), are in a
unique situation today. Not only are w e approaching the end of
a century, w e are also approaching the end of a m illennium . There
has always been and there will always be a special excitement of
charged energy during such an era especially during the first two
or three hundred years afterwards, and som etim es before. We need
only observe history to see this.
But today is different from our recorded past. Never before during
such a recent recorded cycle have hum ans had available to them
such potential and such power. And, perhaps, never before has
hum anity been so out of touch w ith its spiritual heritage. W hat are
we going to do? That crucial question m ust be decided now! Note
these w ords to a m odern song w ritten by a group of traditional
Australian Aborigines w ho are connected especially close to myself:
"There is an ancient culture and a m odern flock. A drilling rig in a
sacred rock. Those angry words upon the flags, w on't m ake that
dream ing com e back." (By W arum pi Band). This is m erely one
indication of our hum an plight. A 50,000 year-old spiritual culture is
in danger of dying. W hy? Truly, as w ith the O rder and other spiritual
movements, the creation cannot die in spiritual planes; b ut hum an
beings can lose touch. If this happens, w e enter the ultim ate cycle of
starting, again, at the beginning.
The Cosmic is im personal. It is, and it does w hat it does. It is
not concerned w ith hum an affairs other than being our source.
We, therefore, m ust realize this and take responsibility for our actions
so that we m ay return home. This is true Service. Such is our purpose
as hum an beings.

The Movement Toward Enlightenment

33

The ultim ate question arises: Are hum an beings capable of this?
The answer, naturally, is "yes." Even though w e m ay not act in that
direction, we are capable, as we cannot be separate from the One.
However, if we ask if w e are accomplishing our goal, then I think the
answ er is obvious. No, we are not. We are at a crossroads w here the
realization of w hat w e m ust do is very close, but the act of doing is
so far away. It is at this point w here the O rder is vitally im portant.
We m ust solidify into a m ovem ent w ithin every aspect of ou r action
to assist others to realize and then to help them act. This is w hat
our teachings teach and w hat the Order, as a collective unit, does in
its activities.
Each Rosicrucian is responsible for refining his or her mystical
awareness. Followers have always made, in the past and present, the
mistake of personifying an avatar and thereby placing all respons
ibility upon this individual, and thus releasing such responsibility
from themselves. In history, a person becom es an example, a leader
w ho is responsible for teaching of the M aster W ithin. An im perfect
understanding on the part of the student begins to ascribe allegory
and m yth to the teachings. After a few generations, the myth becomes
dogma; and the teachings become a mystery which the esoteric Order
preserves in purity and protects in spiritual planes. To know w hat is
there, one m ust be there oneself. Such knowledge will not be given
in w ords or channeled" by others.
It is tim e to realize that there is no individual avatar. There never
was. The avatar is a movement, it has always been. But it is not any
movem ent; the m ovem ent is special. The crucial m ovem ent is now
in the process of m aturing. It is the Rosicrucian m ovem ent. But it
will not m anifest unless we, as Rosicrucians, realize our true w orth
and keep alive w ithin its heart the intensity of fire.
As always, w e must be concerned with the physical vehicle, as our
foundation is As above, so below." The physical m anifestation of the
C onfraternity of the Rose Cross is such a vehicle, and Rosicrucians
of the past knew this fact quite well. The vehicle w as applied toward
purposes of Light to accomplish a goal by way of a process, the result
being a profound im pact upon society. W ho is responsible for the
introduction of the scientific method, freedom of thought, the elem ents

of dem ocracy and similar systems, the advancem ent of peace and
culture, and m uch m ore? The philosophers and mystics, m any of
w hom w orked w ithin movements, and m any w ithin the Order.
Indeed, the O rder has exercised a profound impact upon civiliza
tion in various centuries; most notably during the 17th century. At
the sam e time, w e m ust realize that such im pact is not momentary,
but rath er directed as a process to create a goal. The advanced
concepts introduced to hum anity of the past w ere not to be used
for control and power, or even influence although w e can see
that those of little understanding w ould attem pt to do just that. In
reality, that w hich was introduced was m erely m eant to catalyze all
people to begin to take the responsibility to speed their w ay tow ard
enlightenm ent.
Today w e are entrusted w ith the responsibility to perpetuate the
m ovem ent into the next phase. As Imperator, I am obligated to state
that I am fully aware of the responsibility and have shared in the
vision of the past and the future. M y vows are to assure accomplish
ment. I have seen our success and know the f tt h which must be taken.
I also know the challenges and obstacles. As w ith all Im perators,
my counsel is:
Do that which must be done and can be done in no other way.
In reference to the events occurring within the Order: I will not say
why it m ust take place in the m anner th at it does, because it is
self-evident. I will only say that it does so in accordance w ith a plan of
a future of necessity in which all Rosicrucians share. We must realize
the difference betw een the O rder and its physical vehicle, and w e
m ust realize that the vehicle needs to be a reflection of the Order.
O ur administration directs the vehicle. O ur officers must, by necessity,
direct the Order, and they m ust appreciate and serve the Tradition.
Of them , I will not accept less than excellencenot because of my
ow n personal feelings, but rather by responsibility of a m ovem ent
set forth several centuries ago.

Determining
Rosicrucian Affiliation
I n identifying certain historical
persons involved w ith Rosicrucianism w e need to keep in m ind that
because of various religious and political persecutions of centuries
past, Rosicrucians, for obvious reasons, were sworn to secrecy regard
ing th eir m em bership. Even know n R osicrucian apologists such
as Robert Fludd and M ichael M aier never publicly verified their
Rosicrucian affiliation.
And yet, w e know that a n u m b er of historical figures w ere
Rosicrucian, and if one looks closely there are various references
suggesting R osicrucian affiliation th a t are often overlooked by
historians as being insignificant. For example, the Royal Society of
today is derived from the efforts of a group of known Rosicrucians:
Theodore Haak, John Pell, and Samuel Hartlib, to nam e but a few.
The group w as first know n as the Invisible College,'' later as the
"Rosicrucian College," and finally as the "Royal Society" a nam e
conferred by King Charles II in 1662.
In researching certain individuals and th eir associates or col
leagues, a distinct p a tte rn or trend can be observed as the result of
association or affiliation with a particular movement. In the case of the
Royal Society, there are definite Rosicrucian undercurrents involved.
Quite frequently today, individuals such as Isaac Newton or Rene
Descartes are looked upon prim arily from scientific or philosophical
view points and less so from biographical or historical points of view.
Biographies of such historically prom inent individuals often concen
trate on their scientific or philosophical contributions to civilization,
often ignoring other aspects of their lives.
In researching a n d discussing th e R osicrucian affiliation of
someone, say, like Descartes, w e m ust realize that the Confraternity

of the Rose Cross is a m odernized version of age-old Rosicrucianism,

organized to m eet the needs of today. In the tim e of Descartes, the
O rder was quite differently structured than it is now. In those historic
tim es the O rder was not centralized, and in those dangerous times
there w ere no m em bership cards or outer signs of Rosicrucian
affiliation. The necessity for those Rosicrucians to rem ain secretive
about their m em bership has m ade it extrem ely difficult for today's
historians to docum ent personal Rosicrucian affiliation.
Also the term "Rosicrucian" has often been used generically. An
individual might be considered to be "Rosicrucian because of the
nature of his or her idealsw hich might happen to coincide w ith
(and thus help perpetuate) the traditional ideals of Rosicrucianism.
This is partially w hat is m eant w hen we refer to the traditional history
of Rosicrucianism.
However, I feel that m uch of the traditional history of the O rder
th roughout the centuries can be docum ented, even though the
research can be quite difficult and complex.
In reference to Descartes, m uch has been w ritten about his
association w ith the Rosicrucians; however nothing has really been
resolved. M uch of this confusion stems from Descartes' reclusive and
som ew hat contradictory nature. O n the one hand he denied ever
having contacted the Rosicrucians, while on the other hand he is said
to have set out on a search for the Order. As a result, historians through
the centuries have either supported Descartes' Rosicrucian association
or em phatically denied it. Perhaps one of the most revealing w orks
on the subject is Henri Gaston G ouhier's Les Premieres Pensees de
Descartes ("The First Thoughts of Descartes"), published in 1958. Most
of the book is devoted to the Rosicrucian subject and is a legendary
research, in part, from a notebook kept by Descartes at the tender
age of tw enty-three (1619). Unfortunately, G ouhier does not tell us
w here he acquired the journal, or its present location.
It should be mentioned, however, that Gouhier's book is consistent
w ith w hat is know n about the accounts of Descartes' life, and the
w ork is th e last in a line of several w o rk s concentrating upon
Descartes' Rosicrucian connection. The first published m ention of

the subject is in 1624 in Dr. Nicolaes W assenar's Historich Verhal,

w here the author claim ed that Descartes was indeed a Rosicrucian.
It should be noted that Nicolaes W assenar is thought to be the father
of Jacob Wassenar, a m em ber of the Rosicrucian Circle in Holland.
Jacob W assenar was also a close friend of Descartes.
The French historian Charles Adam believed that Descartes was
a Rosicrucian, but states that it cannot be proven. However, Adam
felt th at w h at could be proven practically m akes it certain that
D escartes was indeed a m em ber. To be m ore specific, Adam is
referring to D escartes' associations w ith such know n Rosicrucians
as Cornelius van Hooghelande (whose father published w orks on
alchemy], Jacob Wassenar, Isaac Beekman, and Johann Faulhaber, to
nam e but a few.
O ther historians have researched the above point, and it certainly
was a popular topic in the Netherlands, France, and Germ any at the
beginning of the 20th century. However, in m ore recent tim es such
research has lost its appeal, and presently in England and the United
States any m ention m ade concerning Descartes and the Rosicrucians
is only m ade in passingm ainly because the em phasis of research
is placed upon D escartes' philosophical contributions rather than
upon historical and biographical m aterial. However, regardless of
w h ere the em phasis of research is placed, there rem ain certain
aspects of D escartes' life w hich m ust be considered. By utilizing the
various m ethods to prove Rosicrucian affiliation, w ritten verification
by Descartes is not conclusive at this time. We do know, however,
that Descartes was preoccupied at an early age w ith Rosicrucianism,
as w ere m any o th er individuals influenced by th e R osicrucian
m anifestos that w ere published at that time. Descartes had set out in
search of the Rosicrucians, and had m ade contacts w ith Beekman
and W assenar in Holland, Faulhaber in Germany, and a circle of
others. Also, contact w as m ade w ith Jan Baptista van Helmont, the
fam ous Rosicrucian w ho tried to reconcile the differences betw een
the m ystical and naturalist Rosicrucians.
T he friendships that Descartes m ade w ith various Rosicrucians
at an early age w ere retained throughout his life. This fact alone

leads one to believe th a t D escartes' in te rest in R osicrucianism

indeed rem ained alive. Cornelius van Hooghelande, a Dutch doctor
w ho was one of Descartes' closest friends for m any years, was actively
involved in the study of alchemy, and both he and his father claimed
to be Rosicrucians. W hen D escartes departed Holland for Sweden
in 1649, he left for safekeeping w ith H ooghelande a tru n k contain
ing personal correspondence and private w ritten m aterial w hich
Descartes w anted no one to read. It will be interesting to discover
som eday w h a t it w as that D escartes actually left behind in that
m ysterious tru n k . U nfortunately, its w h ereab o u ts are presently
unknow n. We can only speculate as to its contents, but perhaps the
w ritten verification of Rosicrucian affiliation could be found there.
It should be noted that the G erm an philosopher Leibnitz m ay
have had access to some of Descartes' obscure works as he is known
to have m ade some interesting rem arks concerning Descartes' philo
sophy and beliefs. This is not surprising since Leibnitz seem s to have
had access to various hard-to-find m anuscripts. Leibnitz was a close
friend of, Francis M ercurius van Helmont, the son of Jan Bapdsta
van Helmont.
In reference to lost m anuscripts, in 1620 D escartes w ro te a
m athem atical treatise dedicated to the Rosicrucians entitled "Polybiicosmopolitani Thesaurus Mathematicus.* All that survives today
is the title.
Another close associate of Descartes, Johann Faulhaber, a m ath
ematics professor at Ulm, dedicated his work, Mysterium Arithmeticum
(1615), to the "most enlightened and fam ous Brothers R.C." O ther
associates of Descartes included Jan Amos Comenius, a Czech theo
logian and teacher, and a circle of English followers, including John
Pell, Samuel Hartlib, and Theodore Haak. This circle of friends has
been credited w ith the original idea leading to the form ation of the
Royal Society the original idea actually coming from Theodore Haak.
Descartes m aintained considerable correspondence w ith John Pell
and, on at least one occasion, had m et w ith Com enius in Holland.
O ther references concerning Descartes' Rosicrucian association
are m entioned in a book by a D octor Meyer, published in 1911.

Also Pierre Daniel Huet, in his m em oirs published in 1692, m ade

m any references concerning Descartes and his Rosicrucian connec
tions. H uet also w rote that he felt Descartes did not die in 1650, but
faked his funeral and w ent to northern Sweden w here he devoted
the rem ainder of his life to the study of occult subjects. O ther w riters
have suggested the same theory, citing letters w ritten in 1652 and
1656 betw een Descartes and his benefactress, Q ueen Christina of
Sw eden. T hese letters are supposedly p u b lish ed in Adam and
Tannery's Oeuvres de Descartes ("Works of Descartes"). This w ork has
never been fully translated into English.
It appears that Frances Yates bases her conclusions concerning
Descartes on specific source m aterial that can be traced to Haldane
and Ross' work, The Life and Times of Descartes, first published in 1905.
And that source is taken from the first biography of Descartes, written
by Adrian Baillet in 1692, certainly the conclusions are the sa m e
However, the subject of Rosicrucianism still rem ains obscure in those
w ritings since the authors w ere unfam iliar w ith it. Nevertheless, I
believe that in keeping w ith Charles Adam's conclusions, the existing
proof is that Descartes was indeed a Rosicrucian. Certainly in line
w ith Adam and Tannery, Gouhier, and even Yates, the subject needs
m ore extensive research utilizing all sources in considering the subject
in m ore detail.

The Mission of the

Confraternity of the Rose Cross
A s m em bers of the C onfraternity
of the Rose Cross (CR+C) w e know that our organization is over
three thousand years old. But w hat does that signify?
As Rosicrucians, we have a different perspective, as well as under
standing, that only those of a traditional m ind can fully appreciate.
The num ber of years we have been in existence is not w hat is im port
ant. It is the fact that w e are, w hich gives us value. In a linear
sequence of events, it m akes no difference w hether we have existed
for 50,000 years or 10 years. It is w hat we are that makes us im portant
and, like the year that w e celebrate, w h a t w e are is also unique.
As we study Rosicrucian teachings, w e slowly begin to awaken to
the values taught by the Order. We slowly begin to unravel the
m ysteries that surround such topics as cycles and tradition. Through
such teachings something almost magical begins to happen. W ithin
our hearts an awakening begins of something w hich is intangible
w h ich c an n o t be expressed by w ords or in te lle c tyet, alm ost
paradoxically, is expressed by w ay of a knowing w hich transcends
all knowledge. This knowing is the first sign of an opening into the
vastness of mysticism. I think that if w e take tim e to m editate upon
w hat w e have read and learned in the monographs, we will find that
our knowledge is m uch m ore vast than the w ords studied. Let us
appreciate that, because often unrecognized by the student is the fact
that som ething rem arkable in our individual attainm ents has m ani
festeda newness, yet ancient beyond m easure. W hat is the nature
of this "ancient newness"? We will find that answ er in our tradition.
Amongst CR + C's m em bership there is a trem endous am ount
of interest in our history. The idea that Sir Francis Bacon was an

Imperator, or the concept that 17th century Rosicrucianism exercised

a profound im pact upon European society and set forth an evolution
of hum an thought and custom , excites the im agination and interest.
But, of w hat other value is this knowledge? Is it truly im portant?
The answ er is both yes and no. No, it is not im portant if we only
allow the interest to excite the imagination and debate endlessly about
w hat really happened in Paris in 1622, or w ho really w rote the
Rosicrucian M anifestoes. The answ er is yes if w e understand and
participate in the m ovem ent. H erein lies the "secret" to u n d e r
standing the im portance of our history and tradition: "To participate
in a m ovem ent."
W hy is it im portant to preserve and perpetuate our tradition?
Because our mission is not yet complete. How m any of you have
thought of Rosicrucianism as a m ovem ent set forth to complete a
mission, or looked at our history and seen that message so blatantly
w ritten? How m any of you have connected the private teachings w e
study so diligentlyand w hich exercise a profoundly beneficial
im pact upon our livesw ith the Temple initiations and rituals, and
wed them w ith traditional Rosicrucian values? These three points, the
Law of the Triangle, produce the fourththe square or foundation
and reveals to us our m ission.
In the sam e way that the purpose of life, an age-old argum ent,
cannot be defined, this mission cannot be stated. Simply put, there
are no words. There is only a knowing. As m entioned earlier, this
knowing is the vastness of mysticism.
To Rosicrucian mystics, it is a truism that for truth to be known,
an awakening m ust manifest. This awakening is a transition from the
intellect to the mystical consciousness and its application. This is,
naturally, self-evident to Rosicrucians. W ithout such a transition,
tru th rem ains elusive. That, too, is self-evident. Before those who
know and are entrusted w ith the truth can state it, there m ust be an
audience to receive the truth and, m ore importantly, to know it. Once
w e know the truth, w e becom e it, we live it, w e are it.
As an example, I m ade reference earlier to the argum ent con
cerning w ho w rote the 17th century Rosicrucian Manifestoes, an

arg u m en t not unlike the one concerning the au th o rsh ip of th e

Shakespearean plays. Some scholars say the Rosicrucian M anifestoes
w ere w ritten by an individual nam ed Andrea, w hile others nam e
Sir Francis Bacon as the author, and some even say D r John Dee.
To identify any individual as the author and prove it unquestionably
w ould be to identify the w ork as the product of one individual.
W hether it was intended that w ay or not, such a m ark of distinction
w ould limit the effect of the w ork as a product of one individual's
m ind for the accom plishm ent of a specific purpose.
But in areas of Rosicrucianism, w hy is there so m uch controversy
in questions of this type? Perhaps so as not to place limitations. And
w hy not place limitations if not to preserve and ensure the success
of a m ission? If the tru th be know n, no one person w rote the
Manifestoes. They w ere put into words by one person, and m ade
public by a group. The M anifestoes are not the p roduct of one
individual, but, rather, the product of a m ovem ent to accom plish a
m ission derived from the hearts of those w ho attained a mystical
consciousness and w ho necessarily recognized and took the respons
ibility to perpetuate the Work. W hen we rem ove ourselves from the
limitations of individual personality in m atters of Light and identify
w ith a m ovem ent of an om nipotent nature, our mission becomes
obvious. We simply know.
Mysticism is a n essence. Rosicrucianism is our path, or technique.
O ur tradition is our vehicle, consisting of all that w e are and will
become. In addition to our doctrine and ritual, CR+C is also a cultural
a n d educational organization. Let us not think of the latter two
aspects as separate functions or extensions of CR+C, because they
are n o t We are not m erely an organization that perpetuates culture
and education. We are a traditional culture living in a contem porary
society. We are a world society w hich knows no national boundaries
and w orks in peace and harm ony w ith all humanity.
T his situation is historically u n iq u e and, in a way, identifies
our m ission as w ell as explains m any of our actions. W hen past
Im p erato r Ralph Lewis said th a t R osicrucian studies assist the
student to develop a living philosophy, he was not only speaking of

the personal benefits to individual students, but also ensuring that

the elem ents of the mission are ingrained w ithin each student.
We are a society, w e are a culture, regulated by our traditional
laws to ensure that w e respect, help, and serve humanity, and not fall
victim to the lim itations of power, control, and w ar problem s w hich
beset non-m ystical societies and cultures.
More than three thousand years ago, w heels w ere set into motion
and a plan w as instituted. O ur traditions and our activities w ere not
always limited to physical realities, and could not always be m easured
by historical docum entation, nor is m easurem ent even rem otely
necessary. M ystical reality, Rosicrucian reality, cannot have such
limitations. The im portant thing is that the tradition rem ained alive
in the hearts of many, yet few, people for a very long time. The
tim elessness of our tradition and the lim itlessness of our knowledge
have worked for a directed purpose w hich I feel w e will see fulfilled
during most of our lifetimes.
However, fulfillm ent is only a beginning, for w hen a creation is
complete, a direction m ust be intensified. Our beginning is to manifest
that direction. It is now, m ore than at any previous time, that our
Work will be the most difficult, and our need is you. Our Order, our
mission, requires all of us to push ourselves endlessly and tirelessly.
Sir Francis Bacon w rote of the 'N ew Atlantis," and m any thought
that he referred to America. But from our perspective, it is time to
realize he did not consider a particular place, but rather a condition
of a universal nature to be the New Atlantis." Plato, in the Timaeus,
Critias, and The Republic, w rote of the "old" Atlantis. In the traditional
sense, the "Old Atlantis" failedor did it? The "New Atlantis" is our
decision to make.
This is indeed a crucial time. We are beset by ignorance as well
as am bition and power. Even our O rder has felt the effects of
self-serving individuals and groups w ho do not w ant to, or cannot,
recognize the mission. But such can only be expected. This is the
w orld condition. W hat will it becom e? Indeed, our w ork now is
the m ost difficult, and not everything is clear to everyone. Each of
us needs to recognize this situation so that w e can know w hat to do.

Do not be misled into thinking that there is a battle betw een

Light and Darkness. There is only Light. We serve Light. D arkness is
an illusion. Although it is true that Darkness has been created into a
reality, it is still an illusion nonetheless.
We do not fight illusions; we transcend them . But all of this is
well stated in our teachings, rituals, and traditions, and, as the mission
has dictated for over 3000 years, in our hearts. We face a difficult
task, but w e have been well taught.
Indeed, this is w hy we traditionally celebrate each new year on
the date of the Spring Equinoxto give thanks and to honor our
purpose. This year I would like to expand this tradition for a period
of fifty-two days, by daily rededicating ourselves to Rosicrucianism
and its mission, as well as to conduct esoteric w ork in our Service to
Light and the fulfillm ent of a plan. I know all of you w ill continue
to w ork in your ow n w ay throughout your lives.
We, indeed, have som ething to celebrate!

Laws of the Rose Cross

I n 1656 there appeared an English
translation of a Latin w ork authored by the Rosicrucian M ichael
Maier. This original w ork was entitled Themis Aurea and appeared,
published in English, as the Laws o f the Fraternity o f the Rosie Crosse.
In this book, Michael M aier wrote: "When there are m ultitudes
and great diversity of Laws, we m ay probably conjecture that there
will happen m any crim es and enormities; for he that sleighteth the
straight path of N ature and Reason, will certainly be misled into m any
w indings and labyrinths before he com es to his journeys' end." In
reference to the Rosicrucian laws, M aier wrote: "From these incon
veniences our Laws are free, as well in quality as number; they are
voluntary, and such to w hom all may easily assent as most Rational."
From the above, it is not difficult for us to perceive the insight
that M aier had into the laws and custom s of the society of his day.
Also, we find in the above statements a distinction m ade betw een the
necessarily complex structure of a society's legal and judicial system
as com pared to the simple nature of the code of ethics to which Rosi
crucians adhere. W hat is this distinction? Was M ichael M aier stating
that a given society's laws were inadequate, or perhaps unjust, due to
the hum an addition or error brought about by the deviation from a
"higher" code? And was Maier implying that the Rosicrucians, because
of their understanding of this so-called higher" code, w ere above a
society's set of laws due to their inherent perception and wisdom ?
It is quite evident that in centuries past there existed organizations
w hich w ielded enorm ous pow er of both a political and religious
nature for the purpose of shaping and m olding society so as to attain
some end. Unfortunately, some of those organizations felt that the

desired goals justified the use of any m eans to attain them . In other
words, the ends justified the means. Such a doctrine results in suffer
ing, contradiction and chaos. Subsequently, the very laws that w ere
designed to guide hum anity could also be used to its detrim ent.
Such can be the nature of pow er if not correctly understood and
practiced w ith knowledge and responsibility. Rosicrucians and allied
organizations and m ovem ents have always understood this concept
throughout the centuries, and have alw ays sought harm ony and
consistency in all of our doctrines and activities. Evolving out of
our understanding, there has developed an attitude of dedicated
responsibility to the highest morals and integrity that was, and still is,
practiced as service to all societies and to all of humanity. Consequently,
the Laws of the Rose Cross have not been laws by w hich Rosicrucians
are placed above the laws of society, but are laws of m oral integrity
instilled w ithin each Rosicrucian voluntarily of his or her own accord
and because they are known to be for the ultim ate benefit of all.
The distinction betw een the laws of society and those of the
Rosicrucian lies w ithin this m oral integrity. It is because of our
dedication to the responsibility inherent in our doctrine that we can
never accept the dictate that the ends justify the m eans because w e
know that the ends are the means. We realize that if all of hum anity
is to benefit from the w ork of the Rosicrucians, there m ust be a
consistency of action that conform s to a clear singleness of purpose.
It is this very attitude that has illustrated to the world throughout
the centuries the uncom prom ising service given by Rosicrucians to
humanity. No, w e have never been, nor have we ever placed ourselves,
above the laws of any society. If we w ere ever to do so, for w hatever
reasons, we w ould be guilty of crim es against hum anity, thereby
contradicting our very purpose of existence. We recognize a system
that coincides w ith the m undane aspects of hum an endeavors and
silently work w ithin a given structure so that the structure may grow
and evolve.
The Laws of the Rose Cross, which Michael M aier reintroduced
from previous tim es into the world of the 17th century and w hich
Rosicrucianism brings into the 20th century, are the integrity and

responsibility m entioned previously. The second law stated in the

Fama Fratemitatis and repeated by Maier best describes the attitude
of Rosicrucians of the past, the present, and the future. That law
states: "That none of them , n o tw ithstanding their being of the
Fraternity, shall be enjoyed one habit; but m any suit them selves to
the custom e and m ode of those countries in w hich they reside."
Simply stated, Rosicrucians will adapt, conform, and abide by
the laws and custom s of each and every country in w hich the O rder
exists. Further, w e will utilize and w ork w ith the custom s and
traditions w ithin each country and respect them for w hat they are
w ithout thought of changing them to suit some other purpose. We as
R osicrucians do not see ourselves as being separate and distinct
from the society in w hich w e live, nor do we perceive ourselves as
being elevated above any other person or group of people. We are not
"special. We are not elite or privileged individuals, nor are w e a secret
society that has access to inform ation hidden from all other persons.
We sim ply look at w hat is and work in harm ony w ith it for the
purpose of bringing about a condition in the world that benefits all.
Today's w orld is, perhaps, unlike any other era in recorded
history. O ur m ajor w orld pow ers are essentially guided in their
technologically advanced societies by an econom ic-based ideology
in term in g led w ith sp atterin g s of diverse form s of philosophic
concepts. These concepts range from the school of rationalism m ade
popular during the 17th century, to the 19th century school of
em piricism . Subsequently, these concepts lent them selves to the
form ation of a variety of economic philosophies w hich serve as a
foundation for today's m odern societies.
It appears to be the destiny of some people to arrogantly assume
that the way in w hich w e live today is so m uch better, so m uch m ore
advanced, than it w as in the past. Or, "My way is so m uch better;
therefore, you m ust conform to my thinkingor else.* It is true that
w hat w e have today is different from w hat was had in the past, as it
will be from w hat will be had in the future. Does that m ean that
future generations and societies will be better than our own? Will
they be m ore evolved, thereby making us inferior? Is the 20th century

American, European, or African m ore evolved than the 17th century

A m erican Indian, or the ancient Greek, or the ancient Egyptian?
W hy do certain religions send missionaries to various locations
for the purpose of converting people to their way of thinking? Is it
because their particular belief or faith is truly better than the other?
M ust we have "pity" upon, let us say, Australian aboriginal society
and traditions because they do not see as we do?
Or, is it possible that if w e really tried, our society could benefit
from certain elem ents of let us say, aboriginal society, from w hich
they find inner peace and harm ony? The point is that before we
can truly be of service to others, that is, before w e can help them ,
w e m ust be perfectly clear about our intentions and m otives and
be sure that they are of the highest integrity. We m ust always be
cognizant of the fact that the process of teaching is identical to the
process of learning, and that teaching necessitates learning.
Truly, today's w orld is unlike any other era. It is not difficult to
see that standards and values are changing. But this, in itself, is not
new because standards and values have alw ays been changing.
Perhaps w hat m akes an era unique is not the change that is occurring,
but rather our reaction to that change.
M any people have the tendency to think that we are entering
into a "New Age," complete w ith a "New Age" philosophy. With this
philosophy comes the attitude that hum anity is entering into an era
of enlightenm entan enlightenm ent characterized by such phrases
as: "Who w ere you in your last incarnation?1', or, "That is bad karma."
Some people are preoccupied w ith having their auras read or flock to
listen to a m edium "channeling" words from a discam ate personality.
O thers join organizations that guarantee follow ers the personal
guidance of "Cosmic M asters" to such an extent that one's salvation
is guaranteed regardless of their inner com m itm ents.
Is this attitude really unique to our era? Or, can w e see parallels
to m edieval belief? Is this attitude a result of enlightenm ent, or is it
a reactio n based on a dissatisfaction w ith a technological and
economic-based society?
It is indeed good and im portant that hum anity is entering into

an era in w hich value is being placed upon the elevation of con

sciousness, but let us be cautious of the sensationalism that is being
placed upon psychic phenom ena and its resulting fatalistic attitude.
Let us not confuse mysticism with such sensationalism. We m ust
alw ays be m indful that our highest mystical ideals are built upon a
solid foundation of responsibility and integrity w hich m eans nothing
unless it is applied and practiced for the benefit of all.
W hat is occurring is not new to our age. Perhaps the sensational
attitude is new, but the traditions, integrity, and responsibility of
legitim ate m o v em en ts have alw ays b een w ith us as w e w o rk
silently in the Art Of Service. Indeed, the Laws of the Rose Cross are
still applicable.

The Value of Tradition

W h a t has Rosicrucianism, contrib
uted to society and, subsequently, hum anity? W hat is Rosicrucianism
contributing now?
Questions such as these are often asked by both m em bers and
non-members of our Order who are seriously trying to assess the value
of our organization in today's world. But, before w e can adequately
answ er such questions, we m ust understand the perspective from
w hich they are asked. That is, w e m ust understand the reasons for
such questions.
Quite often such questions are based upon a m aterial concern.
In other words, the answ er sought is expected to include inform ation
concerning tangible evidence of the establishment of our organization
in the sam e w ay that businesses often establish branches w hich will
produce goods and jobs for any given society.
It is apparent, however, that the nature of Rosicrucianism is such
that we cannot always give the sam e kind of answ er that a business
can. We m ust understand that our O rder is a cultural, educational,
and mystical organization dedicated to the advancem ent of hum anity
through enlightenm ent of the individual. Therefore, our answ ers
to such seem ingly sim ple questions far exceed th e sim plicity of
their nature because our answ ers m ust necessarily derive from our
highest idealism, our mysticism, and the essence w hich it represents.
Further, such answ ers m ust lie in the com m itm ent, dedication, and
sincerity of our m em bers according to their understanding of the ideals
of our teachings.
Perhaps the best way to understand the real essence of our con
tributions is to understand our tradition. We are a traditional Order.

The im portance of this statem ent, at first glance, m ay be overlooked

by som e people in that the value of tradition is often m isunderstood.
Nevertheless, it has a profound mystical and philosophical meaning.
The problem in understanding the im port of such a statem ent could
lie in the belief that tradition is outdated, limiting, and restrictive to
creative grow th in that it is thought to be conducive to creating
dogmatic beliefs. This may well be true of any tradition if it becomes
stagnant in its mode o f operation. However, the true purpose and intent
of any tradition is to perpetuate and preserve a cultural heritage
and its inherent wisdom throughout the ages so as to make it available
to all.
From this statem ent, w e can readily see that tradition is not a
thing in itself, but m ust necessarily be related to a source of a deeper
intent. Tradition, then, becomes a condition that is neither restrictive
nor creative, but rather a tool or a m eans which assum es the attribute
of neutrality. In other words, it will becom e only w hat it represents.
Tradition most aptly represents a cultural heritage. Culture, in itself,
can never be restrictive or dogmatic since the cultural heritage is the
foundation and strength of any given society. In other words, any
society w hich exists today, and even hum anity in general, is built
upon foundations laid in the past. W hether or not such foundations
are thought to be limiting or creative will depend upon how such
foundations are understood or interpreted by the individual.
W hat, then, are the attributes of culture? C ulture represents the
beliefs and efforts of a people who constitute a society. Inherent
w ithin these beliefs are found a philosophy, art, music, and an arcane
w isdom that is traditionally passed from one generation to the next
and thereby preserved as a source or foundation to that particular
society. We may also observe the appearance of degenerative qualities
that assum e a negative aspect. But if we stand apart from that society
and observe how it progresses, w e will find one crucial factor, namely,
that all aspects of generative and degenerative qualities are essential
in producing change and adaptation to new situations by each
successive generation.
If we look at these "negative" qualities from this perspective, and

see them as sometim es being necessary elem ents to initiate change

and growth, w e can change our perspective from one that is negative
to one that is positive. W ith a positive outlook, it becomes easier for
us to recognize a distinctive elem ent w hich pervades and survives
all changes and w hich identifies a particular society. That elem ent is
w hat w e call custom or tradition.
If w e becom e even m ore objective in our evaluation and observe
not one society, but all societies or hum anity as a whole, we m ay be
surprised at w hat we find. We will find a common, unifying denom in
ator that bonds all hum anityand once again culture and tradition.
Different cultures and traditions have modified, adapted, changed, and
infused all societies. In extrem e cases, w hen a particular society and
culture have been conquered by another, it soon becomes evident that
the indigenous culture also changes and modifies the new culture
m aybe very slowly and subtly, but change it does, nonetheless.
As a result, each successive society has grow n and evolved
in the long run because the true essence, the w isdom , the true
foundation of all of hum anity is all pervading and rem ains creative
in potential. This creative element can never really be destroyed. It is
from this vantage point that w e can realize the true creative value of
tradition. Thie traditions are not acts; they are the essence w hich
bonds all peoples even though expressed in m any different ways.
W hat then has Rosicrucianism contributed to society? If we realize
that our tradition is based upon tolerance, understanding, education,
and the upliftm ent of all humanity, we will realize that our tradition
is the unifying, creative potential that is the essence of all tradition
and cultures. That is, our tradition perpetuates the very essence of
cosmic and hum an potential that is know n as arcane wisdom.
We have recognized th e com m on th re a d th at b o n d s all of
hum anity into one u nita factor w hich w as realized by our tradi
tional founders thousands of years ago and is still preserved in our
mystical philosophy, rituals, and attitude today. In fact, w e w ould
n ot be R osicrucians if it w ere not for th e p reserv atio n of our
tradition. By realizing that all cultures and societies have these same
foundations, we therefore seek to preserve and perpetuate those

aspects of custom w hich represent the highest ideals of Truth and

the betterm ent of all.
We do this not by supplanting a given culture by another, but
by encouraging its grow th and developm ent from w ithin through
the m edium of our m em bers in each society, w ho are taught to
exhibit tru th and understanding to the best of their abilities and
to w ork with the structure of each society. We encourage a society's
preservation and growth by exemplifying the com m on bond, the
com m on brotherhood.
Rosicrucianism exists in most of the world's societies and cultures.
O ur teachings relate the fundam ental laws and principles of the
all-pervading essence that we call the Cosmic and are designed to
assist our students in their discovery of truth. We do not force people
to believe or tell them w hat to believe, but rather encourage them to
develop their ow n beliefs. W hat our O rder contributes to society is
relative to how our m em bers react to our teachings. In some societies,
we will find the establishm ent of m useum s and cultural centers that
are for the benefit of all people. We will find our O rder assisting
anyone w ho is in need. But, most importantly, our O rder contributes
to culture, education, and service to all humanity.

Perspective:
The Importance of Versatility
T h e m anner in which the universe
is perceived varies according to the conscious entity that is doing the
perceiving. As an illustration, we are rem inded of the story of the
blind m en and the elephant. Each of the men, touching a particular
part of the animal, described the "true" nature of the elephant. The
m an touching the foot stated that an elephant is like a tree stump,
w hile the individual touching an ear confirm ed that the anim al is
like a palm leaf. Not until sight was restored to these individuals
w ere they able to view the "true" nature of the elephant as it fully
appears. In a sense, it can be said that w ith sight comes illumination.
Is such not sim ilar to the nature of Cosmic Consciousness?
As past Imperator, Ralph Lewis, stated, "Cosmic Consciousness
is simply consciousness of the Cosmic.' Yet, we understand that such
a consciousness transcends our norm al consciousnessour ability
to perceive and understand the universe around us. M any of us
w ho have discoursed at length w ith others will readily agree that
differences of opinion indicate a variance in understanding. Such
variances, therefore, relay the distinct possibility that the very basis
of reality itself is subject to interpretation. If we think about this for
a m om ent, we m ay find that an entirely new perspective of under
standing is revealed.
If reality is subject to interpretation, what, then, is the true nature
of reality? Is it an unchanging absolute that can have only one correct
interpretation that has som ehow m anaged to evade the complete
understanding of a m ultitude of enlightened m inds? Or is it an everchanging condition that has no foundation in truth and knowledge
as we conceive it?

Rene Descartes, the 17th century philosopher, claimed that there

are essentially two types of realitythe formal and the objective. One
is concerned w ith the n a tu re of th at w h ich exists regardless
of how it is perceived, and the other w ith our understanding and
interpretation of that w hich exists. W hether or not the two realities
are identical depends upon the perceiver.
Rosicrucian studies delve in great detail into the nature of reality,
and in order to be clear about this topic, it is essential for us to
have a full grasp of evolved Rosicrucian mystical philosophy. Like
Descartes, we essentially recognize two types of realitythat which
we call reality and that w hich w e call actuality. Actuality is defined
as the true nature of being regardless of how it is understood to exist,
and it is that w hich is not determ ined by interpretation. Reality, on
the other hand, is our conscious realization of our understanding of
the universe around u sin both its m aterial and imm aterial aspects.
In other words, reality is not only concerned w ith the m undane
and m aterial aspects, but w ith the psychic and even mystical as well.
Simply, reality is nothing m ore than our conscious ability to perceive.
And, like the blind m en and the elephant, how we perceiveour
perspectivedeterm ines our universe, our reality.
Philosophically, such a concept creates quite an enigma in that
we find certain questions raised that resem ble puzzles m ore than
anything else. Such questions are: Can we know actuality, or only
think that w e know? Is Cosmic Consciousness, that ultim ate state of
evolved awareness, an inclination, an understanding of the true state?
Or is it m erely the understanding of a slightly different reality the
true state still eluding us?
Though puzzling, these questions indicate the nature of mysticism
and we, as students of mysticism, have dedicated ourselves to their
resolution. However, w e m ust not jum p to conclusions and assum e
that we have the answers. To do so w ould be quite presum ptuous
on our part in that it is quite conceivable that we are not necessarily
looking for answers, but, rather, merely a means by which to understand
the questions.
If we approach the problem w ith such an attitude, we m ay find

that w e can shift our direction slightly and reevaluate our purposes.
First, w e m ust realize th at the C onfraternity of the Rose Cross
[CR+C], is not supplying us w ith answ ers to the questions related to
the ontological essence or mystical enlightenm ent, but rather, it is
guiding us in the understanding of mysticism itself so that we m ay
expand our realities to the m axim um of our abilities. Secondly, at
the sam e time, CR + C assists us in the practical developm ent of
our ow n individual, personal philosophy so that we m ay exist in our
world, our reality, in a way that is as m uch in harm ony w ith the
natural essence w hich w e call actuality as w e can possibly conceive.
We know that our responsibility as students is to apply ourselves to
the best of our abilities and only w e can do that. No one else can do
it for us. CR+C's purpose is sim ply to assist in this regard by m aking
available a system of m ysticism th at has th e search for tru th ,
knowledge, and w isdom at its core.
The astute student of mysticism will realize that w hat we have
considered so far is that regardless of our physical or spiritual
evolution, our first contention m ust be w ith our realities. O ur second
understanding is that since reality is not absolute, but dependent
upon the w ay it is perceived, we should recognize that an em phasis
on reality itself is misplaced. Rather, an em phasis m ust necessarily
be placed upon our perspective for the sim ple reason th at our
perspective, or the m anner in w hich w e perceive, will determ ine
our reality.
Com m on sense then tells us that to grow and learn, we m ust be
open and receptive to new and unknow n experiences, mull them
over, and apply their lessons to our lives in an unbiased manner. In
other words, we m ust stand in another's shoes and see from another's
eyes, and, m ore importantly, challenge not only another's beliefs, but
our own. Let us dem onstrate versatility in our perspective.
For example, usually accompanying such concepts as the occult,
the psychic, or mysticism, is an elem ent of the sensational that has
unfortunately typified the common understanding of these term s and
reduced them to a perspective of divination, fortune telling, prophecy,
spiritual guides and the like. This has occurred to such an extent

that the person not intim ately acquainted w ith the seriousness of
responsible mysticism usually pursues such subjects for the purpose
of entertainm ent. How long will I live? W ho will I m arry? Will I be
rich? Was I an im portant person in a previous incarnation? Am I a
m em ber of the Great W hite Brotherhood? Am I pretentious enough
to be the sole concern of the M asters?
W hat has happened to the responsibility needed to seriously explore
mystical reality? Are we able to seriously challenge our realities so as
to discover truth thus allowing our perspective to grow and to evolve?
There is nothing w rong in having an interest in astrology or the
tarot, for example. But, if we have such an interest, we should not
let the common stereotype interfere with our dedicated quest. Let us
apply our versatility of m ind to those subjects as well so as to discover
their tru e purpose and intent. Let us recall that area of our studies
w hich considers motive, purpose, and intent, as well as the function
of any given thing, and see if we cannot evolve our perspective so as
to becom e aw are of new possibilities.
In the first part of the article, w e have considered the value of
reality and asked some pertinent questions. We have also considered
the postulation that our "realities" are determ ined by our perspective,
or how w e view those im pressions around us.
I would now like to apply this concept of versatility of perspective
to a popular system often used for fortune telling in recent times,
and see w hat w ould happen if we shift our interpretation slightly.
I would like you to analyze your personal interpretation, com pare it
w ith the one I relate, and see if it produces a third effect that, perhaps,
is m ore evolved in purpose.
The system we will consider is the tarot. The perspective by
w hich we will approach the tarot is from that of Christian Pitois, the
19th century librarian of the M inistry of Education in Paris, w ho
discovered a unique m anuscript rifled from the Vatican archives
during the Napoleonic wars. Incidentally, Pitois circulated among
such m en as Eliphas Levi and Papus, and was intim ately involved
w ith the form ation of 19th century Rosicrucianism.
According to Pitois, the m anuscript related a history of a secret

p reserved by th e O rder of the Tem ple (Knights Templars), and

perpetuated through the tarot. The Templars, apparently, acquired
their inform ation from a series of tw enty-tw o plates kept in the
M iddle East after the Roman conquest of Egypt in 47 BC Prior to
that time, the plates w ere actually paintings existing in a gallery in
one of the halls of a n Egyptian M ystery school.
A pparently the Egyptian M ystery school, w ith the gallery of
twenty-two frescoes, used the paintings to depict twenty-two centuries
of prophetic history. As the account continues, the Templars acquired
these plates w hile in the M iddle East and w ere entrusted w ith their
preservation. However, in AD 1307, w hen the O rder of the Temple
was dissolved, the Templars decided to preserve their entrusted secret
by introducing additional cards and releasing the set as playing cards
for the purposes of gambling and games of chance, their logic being
that if they attem pted to hide the plates, they would be lost. How
better to preserve the plates' esoteric w orth than by introducing them
to the profane world under the guise of profane intent? It seem s they
felt that gambling w as m ore valuable to the interests of the masses
of hum anity than esoteric truth.
Let us now examine the docum ented history of the cards to see
if we can find a relationship. We find the first recorded m ention of
the cards in AD 1325, and they were called naibi in Italy. This m ay
be a corruption of the Arabic word nabi, m eaning "prophet." Seven
years later the King of Castile forbade knights to gamble at cards.
In 1361 Caesar Nostradam us w rote about the cards in a casual way.
By August 1427 the cards had arrived in I^rxs. In 1472 the book
Gulden Spiel claimed that the cards w ere introduced into Germ any
about the year 1300. About 200 years later, w e find Gypsies using
the cards to tell fortunes.
Thus, to the best of our knowledge, the earliest year associated
w ith the appearance of these cards is 1300, although 1325 is a m ore
well-documented date. The Order of the Temple was dissolved in 1307,
although the entire process took an additional few years, culminating
in the execution of the G rand Master. From this inform ation we can
see the possibility of this theory since the tim e fram es are quite close.

In addition, Pitois, Levi, and Papus claim that the tarot, origin
ally spelled taro, w as an anagram OR for Order, TA for Temple
(pronounced tample). T hese in d iv id u als also claim ed th a t the
function of the cards from their inception in Egypt was to portray
twenty-two centuries of prophetic history. Interestingly, the tim e span
portrayed is from the 1st century BC to the 21st century AD For us to
analyze this aspect, w e m ust consider a few of the m ajor arcana so
as to get an idea of w hat is being said.
I I The High Priestess: The first card w e will examine is the second
card of the major arcana, the High Priestess. Here is depicted a stately
w om an w ith a mantle, a tiara, a cross on her chest, and a book on
her knees w hile sitting on a throne. This card covers the 1st century
of our era and is an allegory of the formation of the Christian Church.
I V The Em peror; This, the fourth card of the deck, symbolizes the
3rd century. The em peror sits on a throne and holds a scepter. A
shield showing an eagle is by his side and his legs are crossed. During
the 3rd century, a decision w as passed that a Roman Em peror w ould
be elected by the army. Diocletian (AD 245-313) w as the Em peror
and he attem pted to stabilize the Roman Empire. It is said that the
crossed legs allude to Christianity. Certainly, during this era, a reign
of terror engulfed the first Christians.
V I The Lover: The sixth card is called the Lover as well as the Two
Ways. A young m an stands betw een tw o w om en at a crossing. This
card w as supposedly painted to allegorically depict the separation of
the W estern and Eastern Roman Empires in the 5th century.
X The W heel o f Fortune: This tenth card depicts the 9th century. A
monkey and a dog tu rn a wheel, over w hich hovers a sphinx w ith a
crown. The wheel of fortune turns w ith the crowning of Charlemagne
in AD 800. This portrays the establishm ent of the rule of the Divine
Right of Kings w hich w ill last for 1000 years. The C arolingian

Renaissance the beginning of learning in the Occident is portrayed

by the crow ned Sphinx, the eternal symbol of wisdom.
X I I The H anged M an: The tw elfth card of the Tarot depicts a m an
hanging upside dow n by one leg and w ith his arm s bound behind
him. The other leg is crossed. On his yellow skirt are two crescents.
The 11th century opened w ith the profanation of the Holy Sepulcher
by the Moslems in 1009, and closed w ith the occupation of Jerusalem
by the Crusaders in 1099. Again, we find the crossed legs referring
to Christianity, and the crescents, an allusion to Islam. This is a
century of victims, both Christian and Moslem alike.
X I I I D eath: The thirteenth card depicts the 12th century A skeleton
arm ed w ith a scythe mows dow n hum an heads. In this century, more
crusades w ere fought, and the hordes of Genghis Khan (1162-1227)
em erged from Mongolia and reached the Adriatic leaving destruction
and skulls behind.
X V I Tower o f D e stru c tio n (originally, The House of God): The
sixteenth card allegorizes events in the 15th century. Lightning strikes
the tower, and in the original deck a crowned m an falls while another
lies on the ground. W hat does this card represent? Perhaps the
lightning is a symbol representing the discovery of printing w hich
spread light and knowledge and, at the same time, underm ined the
Church scholasticism and royal authorityhence the falling king and
felled priest. We find a century w h ere freedom of thought w as
shaking previously held concepts. And, certainly, the discovery of
Am erica in 1492 caused a reaction not unlike the Old World being
struck by lightning.
X V I I The Star: The allegory of the 16th century is appropriate for
this era of astronom ers. Copernicus died in 1543, Tycho Brahe was
born in 1546, Giordano Bruno in 1548, Galileo in 1564, and Kepler
in 1571.

The Fool: A curious thing about this card is that is has no number.
The question then arises, w here should it be placed? W hat century
does it depict? M ost alleged experts of the tarot place the card last in
the deckcard 22. But not so w ith Pitois, Levi, and Papus. They place
it just prior to the last card, m aking it card num ber 21 depicting the
20th century. If we look at our century, we may find m any foolish
activities. M odem w arfare resulted in the death of sixty-eight million
people in just two suicidal World Wars alone. The advent of nuclear
w eapons and technology running ram pant are just tw o things that
should cause us to think about w here we are going. In the original
deck is depicted a careless-looking m an w earing a fool's cap w ho is
about ready to w alk off a precipice. A dog attem pts to pull him back.
The fool card stands between the judgm ent card depicting the century
of revolutions at the end of 1000 years rule of Divine Right of Kings
and the advent of democracy, and the World card depicting the 21st
century of enlightenment. According to the cards, it appears that we
m ay survive the 20th century in spite of ourselves.
We may note that the symbolism of the decks can vary as they
progress through the years. This is probably because different people
apply personal interpretations according to the perspective that they
hold for the individual purpose and motive that they w ish to convey.
The Confraternity of the Rose Cross [CR+C], does not deal w ith
the tarot or other systems such as astrology, etc, for the reason that
such system s are not necessary to the essential basics of mysticism.
In fact, through m odern interpretation, individual perspective, and
so on, changes usually result which cloud the real motive and intent,
thus altering reality. According to some sources, the tarot was initially
a conveyance of prophetic history. At one time, it was a m eans of
gambling, and later it became a system of fortune telling. We m ust
then ask: W hich is the true way?
The ones who will make the ultimate decision are ourselves. If we
are interested in fortunes, there lies our reality. If w e are m ore
concerned w ith truth, then that is the path we will take and our
actions will be m ade accordingly. All this is a m atter of perspective.

The whole point of this message concerns the value of perspective

and the ability to dem onstrate versatility. In other words, w e m ust
be able to look at anything in such a way so as to derive the most
from it for purposes of growth and advancem ent. In this article, the
tarot w as only used as an example to dem onstrate that perspective
can be ever-changing, and that we should not limit ourselves to
only one interpretation. As far as tru th is concerned, w e need to
discover it ourselves, and the m ore tools that we have available for
our use, the easier it will be to achieve the results w e are looking
for. But, again, as a m atter of perspective, let us not th ink of tools
as being a system , such as the tarot, that is external from ourselves,
but, rather, as a versatile process called perspective that is innate
w ithin our beings and w hich is only confined by those lim itations
that w e place upon it.

D o the Ends
Justify the Means?
O n c e Rosicrucian students becom e
fam iliar w ith the teachings of the Order, it th en becom es th eir
responsibility to apply w hat is learned to their lives. However, m uch
more is involved in this process than m erely applying a law or a
principle for one's ow n personal benefit. The motives behind our
applications are extremely im portant in that they actually determ ine
w hat the end result will be.
In other words, w e are not only afforded the opportunity, through
Rosicrucian teachings, to apply certain laws and principles to assist
us to reach a determ ined end, but we also m ust apply our complete
understanding to the situation and weigh all alternatives before
acting. We m ust always ask ourselves if our motives are pure and in
accordance w ith the laws and principles w hich are being utilized.
The expression of the Cosmic through its laws and principles
does not distinguish between the variations of manifestation. That is,
it does not choose or single out one person or thing over another
for the purpose of arbitrarily bestowing an unearned gift or reward.
If such w ere true, it would necessitate that the Cosmic actually be an
anthropom orphic entity w ith hum an-like attributes and qualities.
Rosicrucian philosophy stipulates that the Cosmic is actually
im personal in its nature and functions through an orderly system of
laws. However, w hen the Cosmic is consciously experienced to some
degree by an individual, one may interpret it as being a personal
experience, but this has no actual relevance to the Cosmic itself.
By impersonal," we do not necessarily m ean that the Cosmic is
m erely a mechanistic function of gears and levers that operates like a
machine, but, rather, it is an all-pervading essence that infuses all things

and has a consistent m anner that causes it to persist in its existence.

We, as individuals, are in reality individual expressions of that
essence, and w e function in accordance w ith the existing cosmic laws.
Perhaps it can be argued from a purely scientific perspective that
the Cosmic is nothing m ore than a machine as it is observed to operate
as such. However, from a mystical perspective, w hich is the core of
Rosicrucian thought, w e can perceive those very same observations
and arrive at an entirely different interpretation. Through a conscious
attunem ent w ith the Cosmic, we can ascertain in it the benevolent
qualities of peace and harmony. We also gain an understanding of w hy
it is im portant to develop our own initiative and take the responsibility
to grow and evolve, and w hy these attributes are not just given to us.
W ith this understanding, we can then see that there is m ore to
the universe and the w orld we live in than is norm ally understood.
However, it is im portant to note that regardless of w h e th e r we
understand this or not, the Cosmic will function as it does and not
the way w e m ay w ant it to function. For this reason it is im perative
that we ensure that w e act w ith understanding and purity of motive.
O therw ise we can get lost in an endless circle of fighting, sometim es
w here there is no battle. Such is the nature of free c h o ic e -e v e n
though we m ay choose to act "against'1Cosmic Law, we are, in reality
only abiding by its dictates and are m erely reacting on another level
of m anifestation.
_
However, as far as our individual selves and h u m an ity are
concerned, such actions that are not representative of our highest
aspirations could have disastrous effects upon ourselves and others.
For the most part, every action w e take is m erely either a part of a
process to arrive at a specific end, or is an end in itself. We w ork so
that we m ay live in society in a m anner that is acceptable to our
individual preferences; we read for enjoym ent or for the acquisition
of knowledge; and so on. In other words, we either have a conscious
or unconscious goal that we attem pt to reach, and our actions are
therefore a process by w hich to achieve that goal.
In the instance w here we have a conscious goal that we w ould
like to reach, the consideration of the goal is our first concern. After the

goal is determ ined, we then m ust decide upon a way by w hich to

attain that goal. If our goal is to m erely eat dinner, little thought is
required to determ ine the process. We only need to find food and
prepare it. But if our goal is to serve humanity, our task becomes
m uch m ore difficult since our goal is very abstract, com pounded by
the fact that there are m any different interpretations of w hat "serving
hum anity" actually means. Suppose, in such a quest, w e confront
another person w ho has a view point diam etrically opposed to ours.
W hat could happen?
An a d h e re n t to m ystical d o ctrines is generally th e type of
individual w ho w ould be m ore apt to have a goal such as service to
hum anity. In fact, m ost of this person's goals will have an altruistic
value prim arily because of the feeling of wanting to give, to help,
and to share the sense of goodness and love that accom panies the
mystical experience. It is here that we m ust be extrem ely careful as
to the methodology that w e use, and it is here that recalling all the
w isdom and understanding that we have acquired m ust be utilized.
At this point we m ust think of our ow n experiences and apply them
to the best of our abilities.
If thought about, the students of Rosicrucianism, or mysticism,
will recognize that they w ere never forced into their actions, beliefs,
or knowledge. Such w ere acquired through persistent hard w ork and
effort. Through such efforts, a channel of attunem ent w ith the Cosmic
was opened, and a knowledge and w isdom of the Cosmic and its
processes w ere acquired, or earned. The role that the Cosmic played,
if w e can differentiate it as being distinct from ourselves, w as one of
direction and influence because w e attuned to it. By understanding
this role, w e can readily see how im portant it is to apply w hat we
learned through our ow n experience and attainm ent to whatever good
we m ay w ish to achieve. In other words, not only m ust the goal be
in accordance w ith purity of motive, the process m ust be as well.
Let us suppose, on the other hand, that an individual is not
concerned w ith altruistic values and acts purely out of self-interest.
Further, let us suppose that this individual's goal is power and control
over others merely for the sake of his own desires. W hat process would

such a person use to acquire this goal? With such motives, would not
any m eans be used or be capable of being used to ensure that the
desired ends are met?
Fortunately, only rarely does this type of individual wield enough
pow er to control large num bers of people. M ore frequently, we
encounter individuals of noble and altruistic goals w ho say that they
act out of the best interests of others and that they are serving
hum anity, and sincerely believe this. But, unless they think about all
of their actions, especially the m eans by w hich their goal is to be
acquired, and act accordingly, they can ru n into serious difficulties.
Often these individuals are so convinced of the goodness of their
goal th at th eir over enthusiasm tends to m ake them farce their
m ethods onto others. Regardless of the goal, how w ould you react if
you felt that you w ere being forced into a situation?
There are m any people w ho believe that the axiom "the ends
justify the means", is valid and correct, and w ould go to any extreme
to lie and deceive, if necessary to arrive at their goal. We ask, if such a
m eans is utilized, can the goal, or end, truly be as altruistic and good
as originally thought? We m ust reiterate that a full understanding of
a situation be sought, that a search w ithin our beings be enacted, and
the dictates of our conscience be followed if w e choose to act in
harmony w ith the highest laws of the Cosmic that we can comprehend.
W ith knowledge and w isdom comes a synthesis of ideas and
actions. We can begin to com prehend an overall perspective and
thereby be in a better position to decide w hich course to take. W ith
this synthesis w e can recognize a harm ony betw een the goal and the
process and perhaps realize that they are identical from a mystical
point of view. From a personal point of view, karmically, our goal
depends upon the process and we m ust ask ourselves if our end result
is truly good if w e utilize questionable m eans.

Legend
T h e Lost Continent of Atlantis, the
subterranean cities of Agharti, and the Kingdom of Shambhala invoke
a peculiar type of conceptor even, perhaps, a m em ory in the m inds
of people w ho hear of such places. It is difficult to describe the feelings
that one experiences w hen contem plating the legends that surround
these m ysterious areas. But if we think about it, we m ay note that
the im pressions w e have are distinctly different from those of, let us
say, 17th century France or of 19th century England. W hy?
Consider the differences between what we know about 17th century
France and the Kingdom of Shambhala. France is a country that exists
today and w e can chronologically document its history for a num ber of
centuries. We have access to facts w hich are academically acceptable
to historians and other professionals. There is nothing so m ysterious
about French history, nor anything readily accessible concerning
17th century France, w hich will incite the imagination to the same
degree as does the m ysterious and legendary Kingdom of Shambhala.
However, in the case of Shambhala, we have an entirely different
situation. Here w e have a mysterious place that some people say exists,
but nobody really agrees as to where, or even if, it actually exists. As a
result, there are m any different interpretations of Shambhala, ranging
from a non-corporeal m yth to an actual physical abode of highly
evolved beings.
In the example of Shambhala we have a distinctively different
thought process employed in its study than w e do in the study of
French history. Since m any people think that there is no docum ented
evidence of the existence of Shambhala, then our norm al research
patterns cannot be effectively employed in attem pting to determ ine

its reality. But, upon further serious consideration, w e will find that
this is not necessarily the case.
The problem in researching allegedly "mythical" places and in
the conclusions draw n by "authorities" lies in the limited inform ation
available for research purposes. Consider, for example, the legendary
city of Troy. Before it was unearthed, it was a m yth sim ply because
there was not enough acceptable proof to prove otherwise! But, w hat
about the myth of Shambhala? Is there any evidence to prove otherwise?
In the West there is very scanty reference to Shambhala, but we
do find occasional reference dating back several h u n d red years.
Usually, the reference tells of some individual retreating for a time
in the rem ote areas around Tibet. However, if w e tu rn to Eastern
sources, we will find a w ealth of additional m aterial that could be
utilized to assist us in forming an unbiased conclusion. But, there still
exists one m ajor problem in trying to discover the truth using the
assistance of available Eastern sources. Namely, there is no real
agreem ent as to where, and m ore importantly, how Sham bhala exists.
As to where Sham bhala is located, we will find varying opinions.
Some people feel that its location is in a rem ote area of Tibet. O thers
think that it is in the m ountains around the Takla M akan D esert of
far w estern China. O ther locations include Ladakh, Mongolia, and
even Siberia.
How Shambhala exists is also an interesting subject. Some say that
it is a city; others, a kingdom or a hidden valley on the physical plane
of manifestation. In addition, some beliefs state that Shambhala is not
a physical reality, but, rather, that it has a non-corporeal existence
on one of the higher planes of manifestation. And, in some instances,
som e people feel that Sham bhala's reality is both corporeal and
non-corporeal at the sam e tim e !
However, the fact rem ains that Shambhala plays an integral part
in the belief system of several cu ltu resbasically in the East and
particularly, at present, in Tibet. In truth, the importance of Shambhala
should be considered not on how, or where, or even z/it exists, but,
rather, upon the role that it plays in relation to its effect on hum an
learning. In this regard, if we are able to shift our em phasis from

legendary speculation to something of actual pragmatic and beneficial

value, we w ould be in a better position to arrive at some m eaningful
knowledge that can be applied to our lives and w hich can help us to
better understand the legendary importance of its existence. In other
words, if we emphasize the reason of its importance or existence, then
the how and w here will assum e a secondary, and in some cases, a
non-essential role.
M any centuries ago there appeared in India the K alachakra
teachings w hich are said to have originated in Shambhala. M ore
recently in history, several hundred years later, the Kalachakra was
reintroduced into Tibetan Buddhism and has become an integral part
of its teachings. The original idea that it originated in Sham bhala is
still intact. It is interesting to note that betw een its first appearance
in India and its second appearance in Tibet, there were a few additions
to the teachings that possibly lend credence to a place of comm on
origin. If we look at these additions philosophically, w e will discover
that elements of Persian and pre-Christian Gnosticism were introduced
into the already existing system. If nothing else, this introduction
dem onstrates interaction betw een ancient civilizations.
Developing around the Tibetan form of the Kalachakra teachings
w e will find that the existence of Sham bhala evolved in m ore detail.
We have a lineage of Kings, and a description of the city and the
surrounding terrain. We have all of the elem ents necessary to produce
a physical reality, except for where it is.
But, the problem of Shambhala is far m ore complex than just
finding its location, simply because until w e discover the real reason
for its existence, the w here and how aspects will rem ain speculative
and uncertain. W ithout attem pting to understand the reason why it
plays such an im portant role, w e ru n the risk of becom ing too
emotionally involved in the imagining and fantasy elements, thereby
slowing our search for its truth and reality.
Such is true w ith all legends. The farther back in tim e and the
m ore rem ote the area, the greater the probability that fantastic m yths
are created, thereby obscuring the real truth. We m ust never forget
that legend has truth in its foundation. But, the m ore exaggerated a

tru th becomes, the m ore the elem ents of sensationalism and fantasy
manifest, adversely influencing people's beliefs. Perhaps if the real
truth w ere know n, the interest in such places w ould not be as great,
th u s m aking the real reasons behind the legends less effective.
Truth is simple and is only obscured by people w ho w ant to make
m ore out of it than is actually there. Ironically, however, if such people
really understood the truth in its simplicity, it could be far m ore inter
esting than any forced belief. As an example, the m ystery surrounding
California's M ount Shasta and Lem uria is exemplified by m ysterious
tunnels hidden beneath the earth. But, for those people w ho live near
M ount Shasta, such tunnels are not mysterious, or even interesting,
sim ply because M ount Shasta is a volcano, complete w ith a netw ork
of tunnels form ed by previous volcanic activity. These tunnels can
be explored by anyone w ho so desires.
In sum m ation, we can see that legends can have diam etrically
opposed effects upon people, depending upon individual concerns.
Legends can be m erely entertaining; they can lead people on fantast
ical trips of sensationalistic speculation; they can close people off to a
belief in any real existence; or they can be used as a viable source to
find real meaning and intent in the discovery of Truth. In our examples
of France and Sham bhala (regardless of a belief in a physical or
superphysical existence), an interest in France will take us to the
history books, and an interest in Shambhala and the reasons for its
existence can take us to the m ysteries deep w ithin ourselves to assist
in our quest for the acquisition of mystical knowledge.

Concepts Regarding
Reincarnation
T h e topic about w hich I am going
to speak is quite com plex but is intended to offer you different
perspectives on the subject of reincarnation, w hich you m ay w ish to
think about over the next few days, m onths, or years. This technique
of exploring a subject follows very closely the convocation talks and
teachings of ancient and traditional Rosicrucianism. As you probably
know, th e m onographs are a 2 0th c e n tu ry c o n trib u tio n to the
Rosicrucian studies. Prior to that time, and even in this cycle of the
20th century, im portant Rosicrucian knowledge was transm itted in
ways other than the monographs. Prior to that, Rosicrucians relied
upon the two following methods:
1. A personal interpretation of symbols and allegories of the O rder
through attunem ent and association w ith the Order;
2. Through the m eans of convocations and instruction from a teacher
w ho, by the way, did not dictate dogma, but rather m ade suggestions
and insisted upon the students' self-reliance to develop themselves.
In mysticism, this is an effective tool for teaching and experiencing,
as it develops free thinkers. On the other hand, it also contributes to
heresies, as past history will tell us. But all in all it gives us today's
Rosicrucianism.
January 1st is the tim e of year w hen m any peoplenot all but
m anym ake New Year's resolutions to begin the new cycle, the new
year. We Rosicrucians are quite familiar w ith cycles, and therefore I
ask you: "Can you think of anything existing, w hether materially,
psychically, or spiritually, w hich does not exist in cycles?"

Reincarnation is a cyclecycles of lifebut w hat do we think of

w hen w e bring up the subject of reincarnation? I am sure each one of
you has thought about it in some way and each one of you has your
ow n particular view point ranging all the way from outright belief in
reincarnation to no belief at all in reincarnation. That is quite all right.
The point is, people have thought about the concept, and they have
m any different ideas about reincarnation w hen the subject is discussed.
Often people are curious about w ho they w ere in a previous
incarnation, or w ho they might be in some future incarnation. And
then there are the doctrines of cause and effect, the doctrines of
Karma that go w ith the subject of reincarnation, ideas about creating
our future and how w hat we do is going to determ ine our future.
M any people have thought about these subjects extensively.
But there is another question that I think m any people have not
really considered at all, and that is the question: Is there a cycle of
reincarnation of thoughts and experiences w hich is independent
of anyone's particular personality?
Maybe we can approach the question by considering the popular
subject of hypnotic regression. I think most everyone is familiar w ith
this subject, and there have been m any books and articles written
about hypnotic regression. In fact, some of the m ore extraordinary
cases of hypnotic regression include people w ho, w h en apparently
taken to previous centuries, actually spoke an archaic form of a
foreign language w hich they had no knowledge of in this incarnation,
an d described experiences w hich, w h en checked by historians,
accurately detailed w hat had happened or probably happened.
Several years ago I had some interest in hypnotic regression, and
just for my own experience I went to a hypnotist, w ho is not a m em ber
of the Order, just to try to experience for myself w hat this is all about.
Interestingly, as a result of the session, which cost $30, the individual
determ ined my personality in previous incarnations, or actually two
personalities in two previous incarnations. The hypnotist referred to
historic figures in both incarnations, but unfortunately, was not all
that familiar w ith the history of that time, and both of those historical
figures lived at the same time!

I know I am one person right now, and I think that each one of
you here is one person. M aybe 200 or 300 years ago (and I do not
feel things have changed too drastically in that period of time) each
person living at that time w as one person as well. But it brought up
an interesting thought, because in m y ow n studies I have been
interested in both these individuals, both of them being philosophers;
and I felt an attunem ent w ith their lives and their philosophies.'
As this cam e out, it caused m e to look differently at the subject of
reincarnation. Is it not possible that an individual can be taken
through some form of hypnotic regression, w here it is not a regression
into the personalities and past lives of other people, but w here they
have attuned to something that occurred in a previous period of time?
In the studies of the Order, w e teach ab o u t the subject of
Assumption. Thus there could be a close relationship to that type of
experience. Furtherm ore, Rosicrucians and mystics are usually m ore
aware of these other form s of m anifestation, w hereas some people
w ho focus only on the one subject might experience limitations.
A nother interesting point is that m any people, w hen they identify
w ith previous incarnations, usually identify w ith som ebody w ho is
well know n or famous. I rather think that people w ho become famous
achieve this status because they are in the right place at the right
time. I personally know some individuals w hom I w ould consider to
be very advanced mystics, very advanced soul personalities, but who
are not fam ous and will probably never be famous. One in particular
I am thinking of happens to be an elderly Australian Aborigine who
lives in the m iddle of the desert, and the wisdom that this person
has is rem arkable. But this person is not considered famous.
So w e need to change our outlook on w ho we w ere and con
centrate instead m ore on w hat we accomplished. And we should not
m easure fame, because that is an attributed aspect of life, but measure
one's contribution, because everyone has an im portant contribution
to m ake to life. And, of course, by being mystics w e are m ore than
just students of mysticism. We know that the purity, the oneness,
and the excellence of the Cosmic is inherent w ithin each one of us
equally. In a sense, it is situations w hich make us "unequal".

This brings up an interesting topic, and that is the egregore, or

created reality. We all create our realities. In both our physical and
psychic lives we create those conditions we w ant to create. O ur recog
nition of this is the secret to understanding mysticism, and then we
should w ork together to bring about the necessary conditions and in
so doing create an environm ent. Each person has his or her own
reality, and we also all w ork together to bring about a larger reality.
We associate w ith people w ho in a sense share that reality, and from
a total world perspective, all of hum anity has created a certain type
of reality. This is called an egregore. In the m ore mystical realms,
among those people w ho are m ore spiritually m inded, we are also at
the same tim e creating our realities, and hopefully w e do create those
realities. That is w hat Rosicrucianism is trying to do, so that w e can
learn m ore about the actuality of the universe.
In the context of this discourse, 1 am using Rosicrucian terminology
w ith w hich you are familiar and thus w e can com m unicate w ith each
other. But let's say you are at home and go across the street to a
neighbor you may never have m et before, and speak about mystical
subjects. It does not always work. Of course, if your neighbor is also
a Rosicrucian, then there will be an im m ediate rapport w hen talking
about certain basic m ystical concepts.
And this also applies to the concept of egrtgore, w hich is a very
im portant idea. We should always know that we are forever creating
our realities; w e are changing; and through the process of growth
and looking at life from the perspective of love, understanding, and
tolerance of the attributes that are ascribed to the mystic in the subject
of m ysticism, w e develop a strength of growing.
I am sure each one of us, after becoming a m em ber of the Order,
has felt at one tim e or another that he or she has been a Rosicrucian
before. Why is this? It is because we actually were Rosicrucians before?
At different periods of time, it reaw akened w ithin those individuals
a purpose to fulfill.
Let us take ourselves way back in history to the beginning of the
O rder and think about the m em bers and w hat they w ere trying to
do and accomplish at that time. I think w hat we might discover is

that the synchronicity of w hat brings people together today is not

necessarily related to personal reincarnation experiences. And if this
concept, this nebulous thing of w hich w e speak, is a reality, is this
not a form of reincarnation but w ithout personality? The ideals, the
m otion or m ovem ent of achieving passed on through centuries from
a lofty spiritual plane of m anifestation reaches down, and it touches
those people w ho are attuning or striving tow ard such ideals. They
are being guided and inspired by that tradition.
There is m ore truth in this concept than m ay be apparent. O ur
Rosicrucian ancestors knew w hat they w ere doing and had clear
direction on w hat was intended to occur well into the future; and
various physical clues can be attributed to and associated w ith this
concept. This is one of the reasons w hy it is extrem ely im portant
that we preserve and perpetuate our traditions.
Just as a m atter of interest, here is something for you to think
about; W hat would happen if those unnam ed personalities, w ho are
perhaps w ithout fame in history books but w ho have nevertheless
contributed greatly to the egregore of our m ovem ent by participating
in the creation of that m ovem ent and set into motion a reincarnation
of thought and action, also began to reincarnate to personality at the
sam e time?
O ur message is certain: Be clear and serve the mission. It is our
responsibility to establish that w hich was set in motion long ago.
W hat we do is not arbitrary, and as tim e progresses the cloud of
secrecy and the m ystery that sometim es surrounds Rosicrucianism
will clear away.

Our Purpose Is Service

W h a t each one of us does in d i
vidually is our ow n personal business and w e will be directed in our
endeavors by conscience, but our purpose here is to discuss how
our actions apply to Rosicrucianism. Rosicrucian choices, our choices,
are collective.
Like it or not, we are presently in a situation in w hich the world
situation is changing rapidlynot only for societies and cultures, but
for Rosicrucianism itself. In turn, we m ust respond to w hat is needed
based on our spiritual principles. There is no other choiceno other
acceptable action.
For years, because of social, economic, and political changes, we
have found the outer (material) aspect of Rosicrucian organizations in
financial hardship, confronted by apparently declining m em bership.
Many other organizations and businesses dealing with issues of worldly
concern face the same problems, and their circum stances concern
us as well. In the past, m uch of the activity of the esoteric O rders
have been directed toward improving their financial situation through
increasing dues and by increasing m em bership through extroverted
advertising. These approaches are fine and they offer tem porary
solutions. But they are not long-term solutions to our problems.
The solutions lie in realizing, recognizing, and rem em bering our
purpose, by exemplifying the spiritual values entrusted, and in ensuring
a quality of action. This is an opportunity afforded us, and this is w hat
we are doing at present.
Placing our sights on the w ork of Service to Light and humanity,
and approaching all other aspects of a physical organization from a
spiritual perspective is com m on sense and sound business practice.
But these represent our worldly and outer objectives and goals.

O ther opportunities are opening up to us at an astonishing rate

(I use the word ''astonishing'' in a positive sense). We are starting to reap
the effects of the causes induced over the past few years. Using our
spiritual heritage as a base, we have begun working on higher planes
of manifestation, on mystical plansnot psychic, but mystical. We are
creating conditions w hich bring us the opportunities necessary to
accom plish w hat we need to accomplish.
O ur purpose is Service. O ur tools are the principles that w e ail
know and understand w ithin our hearts. But, m ore than that is the
application of those principles to all aspects of our lives. Frater Ralph
Lewis, past Im perator of the Rosicrucian Order, was very m ilitant in
this regard. He stated that the purpose of Rosicrucianism is to develop
and instill w ithin each individual a living philosophy, and to make
our m ysticism pragmatic.
Mysticism manifests on all levels of existence. We have before us a
m eans by w hich we can work toward unification through peace and
culture, through recognizing the spiritual values inherent in all cultures
and in all peoples.
We have attracted the attention of age old m etaphysical and
mystical system s from other cultures and they are looking for our
support and help. These systems are compatible w ith our Rosicrucian
traditions and heritage.
The w ork by our m em bers on a spiritual level, m anifesting in
practical application, has had an im pact on the legal system s of
various countries. Rosicrucianism is highly respected and regarded,
and we are often sought out to help find solutions to given problems.
O ur w ork is recognized.
We have been assisting our m em bers and we have produced
programs to help individuals learn more about financial responsibility
to leam for themselves and apply from their own initiative and efforts
those concerns of a m undane and financial nature. This is all based
upon spiritual principles applied to m undane levels. And m any more
things are being done. There are m any m ore opportunities.
We are afforded opportunities in our stated purpose of Service.
W hy is this true? We have started this mission before on the development

of the evolution of the egr&gore of our Order. It started its development

not only on a physical plane, but on the mystical. We have created
conditions in w hich we reap the rewards. But, the rew ards are not
gifts of a process that just allow us to stand idly by. The rew ards
provide the opportunity to w ork toward a com m on goal to achieve
an enlightenm ent for all humanity. And it is work.
There are m ore things working against us than there are things
to accomplish. But, w e have our spiritual values and principles, and
they have been developed and m olded into a new birth, into a
Rosicrucian renaissancea renaissance that is not ju st going to
m anifest in the future, but is already manifesting. It has not m ade
our lives easier; it has m ade life m ore difficult. But all of us, upon
signing our oaths, upon becoming members of the CR+C, have freely
given of ourselves to accomplish these ends in a responsible fashion
and to build and recognize our opportunities. We have done this.
Again, it is just a beginning.

How Do We Truly Serve?

It seem s ironic that even in some
of the m ost advanced societies there exist people who are unable to
care for themselves. I am not referring, in this instance, to individuals
w ho are physically or m entally handicapped, or to those w ho have
no control or direction over their lives. I am referring instead to
individuals w ho have either initially chosen to live a lifestyle that
substantially deviates from society's "norm," or w ho have seemingly
becom e "victims" of the society in w hich they live.
In all instances, we, as students of mysticism, will recognize (or
th in k that w e recognize) that all people are responsible for creating
their ow n circumstances. That is, each individual has created his or
her ow n im m ediate situation based upon previous actions either in
this lifetime or in a past incarnation. Thus, we can effectively debate
the excuse often given for "victims of society" because at some point
in tim e a choice was m ade that resulted in the present situation. To
individuals w ho have a w ell-developed sense of know ledge and
w isdom , it is apparent that people som etim es m ake unfortunate
choices not based on any responsible and knowledgeable decision
but as the result of ignorance or an ignorant act. In other words, the
person did not realize the consequences of such an act w hich may
have already m anifested in an undesirable situation or will do so in
the future.
The term that w e use to describe this sequence of causal acts
and the resulting effects is karma." How often have w e either heard
or used the phrase, That person is in trouble because h e has bad
karma," or, "She got the prom otion because she chalked up some
good karm a points"? By making such statements, what are we actually

saying? Are we acting out of knowledge and wisdom by saying or

thinking such things? Or, are we, ourselves, creating an ignorant act
that will have effects upon us at a later time?
In w riting this article, my m ain concern is not w ith the helpless,
or those w ho drift w ithout any apparent direction in life, or even
w ith those w ho have chosen, consciously or unconsciously, to be the
outcasts ("victims") of society. My m ain concern here is w ith those
individuals w ho use their understanding of karma (what they consider
it to be)in an attem pt to explain a given situation. O ften these are
the individuals w ho are trying to better society, to help those who
are less fortunate. These are the individuals w ho have chosen to serve.
How does our knowledge of karma, our personal understanding
of that concept affect our service to hum anity? In answering this
question, perhaps we should paraphrase the old cliche, The more
we learn, the less we know." After all, in acquiring knowledge, as
soon as w e find an answ er to one question, a multiplicity of other
questions will follow. Such is the nature of learning. This is how we
evolve in our understanding.
Karma explains so m uch; it is an answ er in itself. It opens doors
that, w ith a little effort on our part, will explain an entire new
dim ension of learning.
But it is also a question because it does open doors. And for those
individuals w ho are not looking for pat or simple phrases to explain
circumstances, karm a will be seen, not as an end, but as a m eansa
tool to be applied in finding solutions.
W hat, then, is karma? Can we truly think of karm a as being good
or bad? W hat of those individuals w ho shrug off an explanation by
saying that such-and-such occurred because of bad karm a? Are such
"answers" truly beneficial to hum anity?
Persons w ho even loosely refer to the term karm a in th eir
conversations dem onstrate a degree of knowledge that is essential to
understanding w hat true service actually means. A fam iliarity w ith
the term will hopefully imply a familiarity w ith the conceptand,
even an acceptance of its doctrine. But if our acquisition of knowledge
about karm a stops at this point, then no w isdom has been acquired.

We m ust then ask if such persons can truly help others, or m erely
think that they can.
It is sim ple for persons w ho do not make the im portant con
nection betw een their present circum stances and their past actions
to live their lives w ithout really showing any concern for issues that
relate to the w elfare of others. However, w hen that connection
betw een past actions and present circum stances is understood, we
will find a greater complexity of variables that need to be responsibly
weighed and considered before any true service can be accomplished.
In other words, unless we apply our learning w ith dedicated respons
ibility, we run the risk of doing more harm than good. It then becomes
apparent that both knowledge and wisdom m ust be utilized as our
actions produce more widespread and lasting effects. Perhaps persons
acting out of ignorance willingly affect them selves to no great extent.
But knowledgeable persons acting w ithout wisdom produce a m uch
w ider sphere of influence that can adversely affect others, in addition
to themselves.
How are we to view karm a in this light? Let us interpret karm a
in three different ways. First, let us think of karm a as being a positive
attribute in the service of others. W ithin this definition of karm a we
find people w ho think and act out of altruistic motives, that is, people
w ho are devoted to the well-being of those around them . These
individuals want to promote the greatest good for the greatest possible
num ber of people. They m ay be involved in distributing food to the
starving masses around the world, and, w hen doing so, dem onstrate
that some people in the w orld really care. Perhaps we can say such
devoted individuals are creating good karm a.
Secondly, let us consider karma in a negative connotation, such as
w ith people w ho are acting out of purely selfish motives. An example
would be those people w ho try to discredit others so as to give credit
to them selves. Finally, let us also consider karm a from a neutral
position w hich is neither positive nor negative, good nor bad.
In the first instance, I think that we would all agree that the act
of giving food to starving people is not only noble, b ut vitally
important- But an important principle lies hidden here. Let us say that

the persons donating food are doing so either because it makes them
feel good, or simply because they know that there are hungry people,
and the act of giving is just thatan act existing w ithout any thought
behind it. W hat if these hum anitarians actually contribute to the
w eaknesses of others by acting in such a way that the recipients do
not help themselves? Does the act then rem ain altruistic and positive,
or has it become selfish and negative, either consciously because the
giver feels guilty and w ants to remove that guilt, or unconsciously
through ignorance of understanding the true situation w hich may
not be apparent w ithout applying knowledge and understanding?
Perhaps we can see that our altruistic, positive exam ple has
becom e transform ed into our second instance of karm athat of
selfishness and negativity in the example of doing only to rem ove
guilt. Even the person acting unconsciously out of ignorance, though
w ith noble purpose, has a problem . For example, let us consider a
situation that has most likely happened to all of us at some point in
time. Rem em ber the last tim e you w ere stopped on the street by an
individual who, by his appearance, would be considered by some to
be a derelict. This person, perhaps, asked for m oney so he could buy
food, but our im pression w as that he really w anted alcohol. We w ere
in a situation w here we w ere asked for help. W hat did we do and
w hat did we feel?
Did we ignore this person? Did we go through the m otions of
giving m oney just to be rid of him and to alleviate any discomfort
we may have felt? Did w e refuse on the prem ise that the m oney
would probably be m isspent and we could not really help him by
supporting his alcoholism? Did we perhaps even erroneously think
that by contributing w e would be taking on his karm a? Or, did we
give the m oney thinking that w hat he did w ith it was his problem ?
And, finally, did we either give money or refuse assistance because
of a true and sincere feeling of compassion for the other person?
Only you know w hat you truly felt.
Unfortunately, certain people would use such a situation to their
own advantage, that is, to ridicule another w ho is less fortunate so as
to build a false sense of their own self-esteem. Ironically, such people

are often quick to point out w hat appear to be faults and acts of
selfishness in others. "What good is your education, your efforts to
achieve success, and your success unless you give your m oney to me
so / can feed the starving?" Verily, are our attem pts to better ourselves
simply selfish acts? Does not the process of self-concern and self
betterm ent create an environm ent that allows the opportunity to
serve m ore effectively? If such an attitude is held by an individual,
does not the seemingly selfish act becom e a selfless act? Perhaps we
don't consciously give in a m anner that others expect us to, but maybe
our w isdom has transcended the norm al understanding held by
others. If this is true, does not the seem ingly selfish act become an
altruistic one? Even further, is it really our acquired wisdom which
causes us to act in a m anner that we do?
If I might be allowed to relate a personal experience, a few years
ago, w hen I was in India, I spent several days in Bodh Gaya, the place
w here the Buddha attained enlightenm ent. Literally hundreds of
lepers lined the streets of this small town begging for m oney so they
could survive. I observed m any different attitudes from different
people. Some threw coins at locations w here it would be extrem ely
difficult for the recipients to reach them, thereby attem pting to make
a joke of the situation. Some individuals really tried to help by giving
coins, but you could tell by their faces that they knew the giving was
futile because there were so many lepers and not enough money.
And some simply ignored those w ho were begging.
f asked m yself at the tim e as I am asking you now: W hich act
did the most good? I think that if w e tried to answ er this question, or
tried to judge another's motive, we w ould becom e lost in an eternal
philosophical debate that will never have an appropriate and final
answer. Therefore, w e m ust find another solution.
The tem porary solution that I found w as not in anything that I
could give, but rather in w hat I w as given. I distinctly rem em ber the
faces of three individuals w ith leprosy. They gave m ore to m e than
I could ever give to them . They are the authors of this message in
that they inspired this feeble attem pt to think about and to express
their w isdom .

So, how do we truly serve? Who is really serving? Is service an

act? Or, is it something else? Perhaps in the consideration of karm a,
the third instance of neutrality will afford us an answer. Karma is
simply cause and effect. It is neither good nor bad, but merely neutral.
It is only a situation created by an act m ade by one individual or by
many. If we view karm a in this light, perhaps we will discover that
acts considered in a purely physical m anner are truly secondary to
the true acts of motive and attitude. The reasons behind w hy w e give
or do som ething will create and form our true state of affairs w hich
is not m easured in our physical state of being or environm ent. It is
not m easured by our degree of m astership or attainm ent, but by our
spirituality. Spirituality is not m easured by appearance, environm ent,
or attainm ent. It simply knows nothing but itself because it is all
that truly exists. It is true that there are physical laws of cause and
effect w hich we can also call karma, but the true essence of karm a
transcends all of that. With the proper attitude and motive developed
from within, w ith returns to that w hich is within, and we can realize
that everyone and all things are of perfection.
Again, how can we truly be of service? Service, in a sense, is related
to morality, to notions of good and bad as related to the w elfare of
society. In this way, w e can have true service and acts of service.
Acts of service can be either sincere or insincere, of which the ultimate
outcome in either instance may be good or bad, detrimental or helpful,
depending upon the variables of purpose, motive, and attitude. True
service, then, consists of those variables of purpose, motive, and
attitude w hich are the source and essence of acts. To truly be of service,
to truly understand karma, perhaps we should concentrate our efforts
on the spirituality within, and apply our acquired w isdom so as to
m anifest as the foundation of w hatever act we choose to perform .
We do not have to look long and hard to discover th at Rosi
crucianism is based upon and teaches in h eren t w isdom and its
application. We can be of true service by attuning to that essence and
simply m anifesting it in our beings because it is really knowledge and
understanding that is needed in today's world.

Awakened Attitude
T h e Confraternity of the Rose Cross
(CR+C], is a school of mysticism. Its aim and purpose is to offer a
system of study to people w ho have felt an urge from w ithin to
consciously advance themselves along the path of spiritual evolution.
We at CR+C do not judge the potential m em ber's prior attainm ent
w hen he or she applies for m em bership. Nor do we, at any time,
make any evaluation of the individual's advancem ent during this
m embership. O ur applications for membership only test the applicants
to determ ine if they sincerely w ish to develop the inner urge for the
betterm ent of them selves and of hum anity. After passing this test,
the students of Rosicrucianism are offered a system of study through
the m onographs, and also afforded the opportunity to m anifest their
learning at both an objective and esoteric level through the m edium
of our local groups.
In following the principles of true esotericism, we recognize that all
attainment must be earned by the individuals through their own sincerity
and commitments. The gift of enlightenment is the result of the work of
the student through his or her own efforts. W hat is im portant is the
student's own application of the principles taught in the monographs as
realized from within, from the Path of the H eartnot how well the
student may recite the words and principles contained in the teachings.
Once the students have developed the attribute of working w ith
their ow n inner commitments, our teachings then become a valuable
tool and guide in assisting such persons to develop their spirituality.
On the other hand, the teachings can also assist individuals w ho feel
the inner urge but w ho have yet to realize or m anifest its attributes.
T he subtle point w h ich serves to distinguish b etw een the tw o
approaches, and, at the same time, unifies them , is sincerity.

Those of us w ho dem onstrate sincerity have developed within

ourselves an innate quality that serves as a guide to assist in the
natural and inevitable evolution of our spiritual aspects in accordance
w ith the harm onious nature of Being. We are truly free agents, for
we have felt the attunem ent process and are naturally acting with
responsibility to learn and apply w hat is felt to our conscious minds.
As this aw areness m atures through our efforts, w e sense a
"higher" form of mind, a different type of awareness, a different
m anifested form of logical analysis that is the unification of our inner
and outer natures, w hich creates a third attribute. This third attribute
m anifests as a means, a system, w hich can be utilized to attain an
enlightened state. This system may be called "responsible mysticism."
This form of mysticism excludes phenomenalism, sensationalism, and
fantasy. It includes proper perspective, understanding, and tru ly
practical application.
Students w ho lack sincerity in their approach will not dem on
strate the qualities just m entioned. This results in the distinction of
our subtle point. However, the person w ho has, in some way, felt the
inner urge but does not fully understand or objectify it will find value
in Rosicrucian teachings. Through the seriousness of study, they will
find a system w hich unifies the feelings and realizations to the extent
that sincerity, is developed as a natural process. But, for this to occur,
receptivity to the harmonizing nature of the Cosmic and of mysticism
m ust be inherent w ithin us.
CR+ C is not attractive to students who, in some manner, do not
exhibit this trait. Rather, Rosicrucianism does attract many, different
types of individualsvarying from the enlightened w ho are applying
their w isdom and knowledge for the benefit of others; to the seekers
w ho are learning to realize or awaken; and to the immature, who have
chosen not to synthesize their feelings and learning because of,
perhaps, ulterior motives w hich consist of control, m anipulation, and
the false sense of pow er that comes w ith little understanding. People
w ho fall into this last category do not stay long w ith the Order. If by
chance they do, it soon becomes apparent that they are attem pting
to use the O rder to gain som ething it will not provide.

By considering w hat has been said up to this point, w e can

perceive another subtle distinctionthat is, the difference betw een
being spiritual and thinking that w e are spiritual. Being spiritual is a
natural process of attunem ent w hich m anifests a com bination of
processes in our lives in an applicable way w ith benefit to all beings.
Thinking that we are spiritual m ay incorporate thoughts and actions
similar to those of spirituality, but w ithout the substance of true
sincerity behind it. Although we m ay be sincere in w hat we do, we are
not sincere in relationship to the harmonizing principle of the Cosmic.
The student w ho synthesizes and applies understands those
subtleties well. But, the aspiring seeker who is learning to awaken has
only a vague understanding at best. He or she must be very cautious in
their actions and thoughts and m ust develop a balance betw een the
emotions and the intellect. They m ust be careful not to get caught
up in the mystification of emotionality and call it mysticism. At the
same time, they m ust not objectify or externalize that w hich comes
from w ithin and give it either a m erely intellectual or abstract reality.
We can readily see that a sincere study of mysticism is not as
easy as some seem to think. We cannot m erely read a book on the
subject or even pursue a course of study and thereby become an
''expert" on mysticism. To truly becom e a mystic, w e m ust develop
and evolve our innate qualities, part of w hich constitute our person
ality, and thereby create an attitude conducive to understanding and
applying mystical ideals. In other words, books or courses m ay give
us the knowledge of mystical principles, but it is our inner awakening
that gives us the wisdom to become true mystics. This awakening
involves an [109] inner com m itm ent and devotion to the duty of truly
wanting to face and surpass our limitations for a "higher" cause.
The whole point of our concern with mystical attainm ent lies in the
preparation of developing an awakened attitude. Psychic development
does not constitute such a state, as it is m ore appropriately applied
as a tool after realization. This also pertains to contacts w ith "Masters."
This ideal can only be truly understood after our attitude has been
aw akened through true sincerity and after we have begun to actively
apply our inner commitment and to integrate it into our worldly affairs.

About the Author

G a r y Lee Stew art w as born on
February 26, 1953, in Stockton, California. He received his Bachelor
of Arts in Philosophy from Fresno State University, California and
was later accepted into a M aster of Letters program for the University
of Aberdeen, Scotland, College of M etaphysics and Logic. It was after
being accepted into this program that he decided not to continue his
form al education and subsequently returned to California.
Having been fascinated by the art of mysticism as an intuitive
philosophy for most of his life, his investigations led him to an esoteric
"affiliation" in Belgium in 1971 and again to affiliate w ith the
Rosicrucian O rder in 1975. He volunteered his services to a local
Rosicrucian group and eventually sought em ploym ent at the cor
porate headquarters in San Jose. There, he soon becam e an official
representative, traveling throughout the U nited Sates addressing
groups of Rosicrucian students, as well as m em bers of the public
on subjects including m ysticism , philosophy, m etaphysics and
Rosicrucianism. He also created and directed the Historical Research
Council, w hich purpose was to preserve and protect our Rosicrucian
heritage th ro u g h m em b er research projects. G ary Stew art w as
appointed G rand M aster of the English speaking jurisdiction in 1985
and w as elected Vice-President to the Board of Directors in 1986.
Prior to his death in January 1987, through a process of trial,
testing and Initiation, the previous Im perator Ralph M Lewis had
selected Gary L Stewart as his successor for this lifetime responsibility.
His ritualistic installation took place on M arch 20, 1987, in San Jose,
California.

G ary L Stewart is the Im perator of the C onfraternity of the Rose

Cross |CR+C], Knight C om m ander of the O rder of the M ilitia
Crucifera Evangelica, and Sovereign Grand M aster of The British
M artinist Order. He continues to fulfill the ancient responsibilities of
his office to preserve, protect and perpetuate the Rosicrucian traditions
and teachings.

The OMCE and CR+C are

traditional, mystical and fraternal Orders dedicated to
applying the principles of mysticism in a pragmatic fashion for
the purpose of the collective evolution of humanity.
We can be reached at the local addresses listed on
an insert attached. Should an insert be unavailable,
please direct your inquiries to:
O rd e r o f th e M ilitia C ru c ife ra E vangelica (OM CE)
PO Box 226323
Dallas, TX 75222-6323
USA
C o n fra te rn ity of th e Rose C ross (CR + C)
P O Box 471
Carnegie, PA 15106-0471
USA

G a ry L S t e w a r t is the Im perator of the C o nfratern ity of

the Rose Cross (CR+C), Knight Com m ander of the O rder of the
M ilitia Crucifera Evangelica, and Sovereign G rand Master of
The British M artinist Order. He continues to fulfil) the ancient
responsibilities of his office to preserve, protect and perpetuate
the Rosicrucian traditions and teachings.