Extracting Brahman's Satya from Brahma's Maya (Part 3): Reinterpreting the Rig Veda & Bhagavad Gita

On our multi-part quest to extract the "milk" of Higher Truth from the muddy waters of spiritual ignorance, we have thus far succeeded in establishing that the "agni" discussed in the Rig Veda is neither the god of fire nor the deific "priest" presiding over sacrificial fire rituals. We've also determined that both of these longstanding FALSE beliefs derive from prejudicial assumptions attached to the Sanskrit terms yajna and purah-hitam, among many others. Such prejudicial assumptions are, in fact, among the chief anti-Satya weapons Brahma (the personified Ego Mind) deploys to keep us blindly wandering in the barren and hostile wilderness of earthly existence. 

Or, as Karen Thomson, a Sanskrit specialist at the University of Texas, Austin, astutely points out, "failure to discard a mass of assumptions about ritual meaning inherited from Vedic traditions" is largely to blame for the cloud of incomprehension shadowing these sacred texts. And that shadow darkens the minds of scholars, sages, and laypersons alike.

Because these erroneous assumptions block the channel through which Divine Truth returns to conscious remembrance, we must question everything we currently believe, however cherished, entrenched, or widely shared those beliefs may be. As discussed last time, one of the biggest of these truth-blocking beliefs is that sacrifice is a means of purification and/or homage devised by the Powers That Be for their appeasement and our higher good.

Or, as Course-Jesus unequivocally states:

Your little part [in the at-one-ment process] is but to give the Holy Spirit the whole IDEA of sacrifice. And to ACCEPT the peace He gave instead. WITHOUT the limits that would hold its extension back, and so would limit YOUR awareness of it. For what He gives MUST be extended, if YOU would have its limitless power, and use it for the Son of God's release. It is not THIS you would be rid of, and having it, you CANNOT limit it. If peace is homeless, so are you. And so am I And He Who IS our home, is homeless WITH us.

One of the smaller, but no less Satya-obstructing beliefs, is that the Rig Veda's "hymns" were meant to be poems, and should, therefore, be preserved in metered form for spiritual as well as academic purposes.

I see at least two flaws in this reasoning. The first is that meter is form, as are words; and all form is the produce of Brahma's mirage. So, the metered structure in which the Vedas came down to us was probably imposed to aid memorization and recitation over the centuries of oral transference. Preserving the ego-imposed form must not, therefore, ever take precedence over preserving the substance of the sacred teachings. 

My second issue is that a metered structure that works in Vedic Sanskrit can't possibly be maintained with any credibility when the verbiage is converted into Latin, English, or even Hindi. Any attempt by translators to retain the meter also, therefore, erroneously (egoically) favors form over substance. And this is one of the big reasons Ralph T. H. Griffith's translation of the Rig Veda's first Sukta is much shorter than mine.

Sir Ralph Thomas Hotchkin Griffith (1826-1906)

 According to his biographers, Sir Ralph followed the text of Max Muller's six-volume Sanskrit edition of the Rig Veda. Additionally, he was influenced by the writings of Sayana, the 14th-century Sanskrit Mimamsa (investigative) scholar from the Vijayanagara Empire of South India (near modern-day Bellary, Karnataka). An influential commentator on the Vedas, Sayana flourished under King Bukka Raya I and his successor, Harihara II. More than a hundred works are attributed to him, including commentaries on nearly all parts of the Vedas. Sayana also wrote on a number of subjects like medicine, morality, music, and grammar.

Sayana, who died in 1387.

This all sounds very noble and respectful on the part of Sir Ralph -- but was it? I have my doubts, since conversion to Christianity rather than elucidation of Vedic truths appears to have been his chief motivating factor. Stated more bluntly, Sir Ralph didn't question prevailing assumptions about "heathen" Vedic traditions because he wanted them to be true. Why? So he could feel superior and, therefore, JUSTIFIED in stomping all over India's "primitive" cultural and religious traditions with his big imperialist boots.

I might be wrong about this, but I don't think so. Sir Ralph was, after all, the son of an Anglican minister. While attending Queen's College, Oxford, he was groomed for the Boden Sanskrit professorship by H. H. Wilson (who also held the chair and translated the Rig Veda prior to Griffith). That endowed position was established in 1832 with money bequeathed to Oxford by Lt. Col. Joseph Boden, formerly of the British East India Company, to assist in the conversion of the people of India to Christianity (i.e., Church of England Anglican Christianity).

Accepting this mission, Sir Ralph began translating the Vedic scriptures into English. He later moved to India as a Professor of English Literature at the Sanskrit College of Benaras. Not to be confused with modern-day Banaras Hindu University (a theosophical institution), Benaras College was a "government" school founded in 1791 by the East India Company, with approval from Governor General Lord Cornwallis -- yes, the same Lord Cornwallis of American Revolution notoriety.

Charles Cornwallis, first Marquess Cornwallis (1738 - 1805)

According to one historian, Lord Cornwallis devoted his tenure in India to "laying the foundation for British rule throughout India and setting standards for the services, courts, and revenue collection that remained remarkably unaltered almost to the end of the British era [in 1947]."

So, Griffith, who belonged to Britain's "Indian Educational Service" and later served as principal of Benares College, was in bed with the leading subjugators of India's independence and culture -- not with its advocates and defenders.

But let us not single out Sir Ralph for chastisement, for he is hardly alone in his failure to set aside his preconceived notions about the Vedas. To illustrate my meaning, let's compare three different translations of the opening line of the Rig Veda's first teaching (not hymn or poem) about "Agni."

In Sanskrit, the line reads: Agnim ile purah-hitam yajnasya devam rtvijam hotaram ratna-dhatamam

To refresh your memory, as well as for comparison's sake, my translation of that line reads:

The Fire of God's presence in the Walled City (the Holy Meeting Place within the Temple) stands at the door joining the one who is ignorant to the divine right-guiding melody invoking the inner-radiance bestowing the treasures of Wholeness.

Horace Hayman Wilson (1786 - 1860)

Our first example comes from Sir Ralph's mentor, Horace Hayman Wilson, who (as stated earlier) also held the Boden professorship at Queen's College, Oxford. Prior to embarking on his academic career, Wilson served in India as a surgeon for the East India Company. The first to translate the complete Rig Veda Samhita into English, Wilson published his heavily annotated volumes between 1850 and 1888 -- so some appeared posthumously.

Also like Sir Ralph, Wilson was influenced by Sayana and Max Muller, another Oxford "orientalist" with Boden professorship ambitions. In 1860 or so, Muller lost his bid for the post to Sir Monier Monier-Williams, the creator of the Sanskrit-English dictionary bearing his name. Muller's bid was rejected because a) being German-born and Lutheran, he wasn't part of Oxford's elite English-Anglican "club" and b) he was seen as (and latter viscously attacked for) being sympathetic to Hinduism and, therefore, a traitor to the Christian faith (a charge he denied). 
 

Friedrich Max Muller (1823-1900)

And that tells us all we need to know about the exclusive Oxford "orientalist club" credited with the English translations, definitions, and grammatical rules still revered and heavily relied upon today. It also explains why I chose an illustration from the well-known fable "The Emperor's New Clothes" to open this post. Like the boy who observes and speaks without airs or prejudice, I stand on the sidelines of both Hinduism and academe, befuddlingly asking, "Why can nobody else see what's perfectly plain to me?"

And on that note, let's get to it. Because this is very much a case calling for the extraction of Brahman's Milk of Truth from Brahma's murky pool of deception. 

Wilson's translation of the first Rik's opening line reads:

I glorify Agni, the high priest of the sacrifice, the divine, the ministrant, who presents the oblation (to the gods), and is the possessor of great wealth.

Our second example is Sir Ralph's 1896 translation, which reads:

I laud Agni, the chosen Priest, God, minister of sacrifice, The hotar, lavishest of wealth.

Sri Aurobindo (1872-1950)

Our third contender, from a very different quarter, is Sri Aurobindo. An interesting character, Aurobindo was an influential leader in the Indian independence movement until around 1910, when he shifted his focus to spiritual liberation. Dated 1946, the translation below comes from the website of Sri Aurobindo and The Mother, which includes a lexicon of Rig Veda terms. Where the website links the Sanskrit words to the lexicon, I've inserted the offered definitions in brackets.

Agni, (I) desire the Purohit [our vicar. The god as our representative set in front of man in him]in sacrificing, god, the Ritvij [sacrificing rightly, i.e., according to the Truth, in true order and time], the Hotar [Priest, calling the gods], who gives ecstasy to the highest extent.

Despite coming from the opposite end of the political and religious spectrum, Sri Aurobindo offers an interpretation of the first Rik remarkably similar in character to Wilson and Sir Ralph's. Why might this be? My guess is that, like so many others, the great swami failed (to requote Ms. Thomson) "to discard a mass of assumptions about ritual meaning inherited from Vedic traditions." Even though he understood yajna meant "oblation" or "sacred offering" rather than "sacrifice" (as per his posthumously published online lexicon), he nevertheless actively espoused his engrained and erroneous belief that sacrifice played an integral part in the Divine Plan for the evolution of human Souls. 

In Synthesis of Yoga (1948), for example, he wrote:

  

The law of sacrifice is the common divine action that was thrown out into the world in its beginning as a symbol of the solidarity of the universe. It is by the attraction of this law that a divinising, a saving power descends to limit and correct and gradually to eliminate the errors of an egoistic and self-divided creation. This descent, this sacrifice of the Purusha, the Divine Soul submitting itself to Force and Matter so that it may inform and illuminate them, is the seed of redemption of this world of Inconscience and Ignorance. For "with sacrifice as their companion," says the Gita, "the All-Father created these peoples." The acceptance of the law of sacrifice is a practical recognition by the ego that it is neither alone in the world nor chief in the world. It is its admission that, even in this much fragmented existence, there is beyond itself and behind that which is not its own egoistic person, something greater and completer, a diviner All which demands from it subordination and service.

With all due respect to his Holiness, let me now blow a sizeable hole in his largely accurate statement. For starters (as we know), the universe didn't begin with "sacrifice" -- nor is there any such thing as a Law of Sacrifice. As we've further established, this erroneous presumption arises from a misread of the Rig Veda's Purusha Suktam and its use of the word yajna. As Course-Jesus explains many times, the primary Divine Law governing the dream-universe is the Law of Love also known as the Golden Rule and/or the Holy Law of Giving and Receiving. And, as I've explained repeatedly, yajna means not "sacrifice," but "thought-gift" or, more specifically, "right-minded thought-offering."

As explained by Course-Jesus (and in previous posts), the Golden Rule was intended to guide our creative experiments in "Heaven" -- the "kingdom" God created for the Sonship. That "guideline" advised us to give only (at the level of thought) what we wished to receive in return, because "creation" was a reciprocal enterprise. The Golden Rule governed our thoughts, rather than our actions, because 1) we had no bodies when first we entered Heaven and 2) thought is the one and only REAL creative force, here and in Heaven. This is why Bible-Jesus warns (in Matthew 5:27-28) that lusting after someone is the same as committing adultery. He means that, under the Golden Rule, it is our wishes and desires that go down in the Karmic Ledger for reciprocation. Whether we act on those wishes is irrelevant because our desires, not our actions, generate our inventory of Karmic "receivables."

Or, as Course-Jesus explains in Workbook Lesson 16: I have no neutral thoughts:

The idea for today is a beginning step in dispelling the belief that your thoughts have no effect. Everything you see is the result of your thoughts. There is no exception to this fact. Thoughts are not big or little; powerful or weak. They are merely true or false. Those that are true create their own likeness. Those that are false make theirs. (ACIM, W-16.1:1-7)

Let's return to Sri Aurobindo, whose second mistake is defending his position with a gross mistranslation of a verse from the Bhagavad Gita. Being a divinely revealed text, the Gita no more encourages sacrifice than does the Rig Veda. Neither does it say, as alleged, that the universe began with the "sacrifice" of the Purusha Self.

The verse the esteemed guru misquotes is Bg 3:10. The mistranslation he repeats is, unfortunately, widely and frequently flogged by self-styled Teachers of God to support the Brahma-authored idea that ritual sacrifice and self-sacrifice are practices encouraged in the scriptures. As Course-Jesus explains repeatedly, sacrifice is an ego-conceived idea founded upon the fear of scarcity. Not only does God NOT ask for sacrifice in any form, Course-Jesus tells us, our Heavenly Father is utterly unfamiliar with the concepts of "giving up," "going without," "lack," and/or "deprivation."

To strengthen my argument, let's explore what Bg 3:10 actually says. In transliterated Sanskrit, the verse reads: saha-yajñāḥ prajāḥ sṛiṣhṭvā purovācha prajāpatiḥ anena prasaviṣhyadhvam eṣha vo ’stviṣhṭa-kāma-dhuk

Generally, these words are mistranslated into English thusly:

In the beginning of creation, Brahma created humankind along with duties, and said, "Prosper in the performance of the yajnas (sacrifices), for they shall bestow upon you all you wish to achieve."

Based on a my careful research and intuitive guidance, the line SHOULD translate more along these lines:

Together with the strength of Wholeness, the Living Beings created the Temple-Voice of the Son of God's sinlessness to bring forward the desire to choose the Higher Self dwelling within the Amen (the Name of God) inspiring Kamadhuk (the miracle-cow also called Kamadhenu).

saha (together with) yaj-nah (the strength of Wholeness) prajah (the Living Beings) srishtva (created) puro-vacha (the Temple-Voice of) praja-patih (the Son of God's) anena (sinlessness, guiltlessness, or innocence) pras (to bring forward) avishya (the desire) dhvam (to choose) esha (the Higher Self or Holy Spirit) vo (dwelling within) 'stv = astv = astu (the Amen) isthta (inspiring) kamadhuk (presumed to be another name for Kamadhenu, the miracle-cow).

First and foremost, this verse has nothing to do with Brahma, the one supposedly addressed as Prajapati, a term generally translated as "Lord of All Creatures." A compound of "praja" (offspring or born from) and "patih" (the lord, husband, or Bridegroom), Prajapati actually describes the dreaming Sons of God or individual Souls separated from their "corporate body" or "unified being," which is the Great Purusha or Christ Self.

Secondly, this verse references the same Living Beings, Living Creatures, Cherubim, Seraphim, Hayyot, or Hamlat al-ʽarsh

seen and described by the prophet-scribes of many faiths, including Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Mohammad. And now we know these four "bearers of the Throne of God," "Temple Guardians," "Great Kings," and/or "Burning Ones" also are mentioned in the Bhagavad Gita. Not only are these mysterious "beings" mentioned, they also are credited with producing the Temple-Voice of the Son of God's sinlessness to inspire us to seek the Greater Truth. And that "voice," as we know, belongs to the Holy Spirit. In Ezekiel's vision of these same Living Beings, the Hebrew prophet saw and described these four angelic creatures making a thunderous noise by beating together in unison their four sets of wings.

And, once again, the SAME teaching only SEEMS different because of errors in translation and interpretation introduced by the Truth-veiling Ego Mind.

This brings us to Kamadhuk, a word or name associated with Kamdhenu or Sarabhi -- the deific miracle-cow of Hindu lore supplying the "milk" that fortifies our dreaming Souls against separation-mindedness. In the Gita, Lord Krishna (the personified Holy Spirit and narrator) allegedly calls this mystical "sacred cow" Kamadhuk. Presumed to be a marriage of "kama" and "dhuk," the name is generally translated as "bestower of desires."

I question this interpretation for the following three reasons: 1) Bg 3:10 makes no sense if Kamadhuk means "miracle cow" or even "bestower of desires"; 2) "dhuk" isn't really a word in Sanskrit; and 3) being granted our worldly desires hinders rather than supports our escape from the illusion of earthly existence. 

Based on these three strikes, I'm more inclined to believe Kamadhuk is a compound of "ka" (Vedic shorthand for the Great Purusha) and "madhuk," which can mean "sweet as honey," "bumblebee," or "melodious buzzing." Thus, Kamadhuk probably best translates as "the Great Purusha's melodious buzzing." And that makes much more sense, given that Kamdhenu is, in actuality, a personification of Narayana, another form of Lord Vishnu. All three personas (Kamadhenu, Lord Vishnu, and Narayana), in fact, represent the Living Water -- the vibratory sound, sacred-syllable, or melodious buzzing emanating from the Great Purusha to preserve the Wholeness of Creation.

Now, it occurs to me that Bg 3:10  is a mere three verses ahead of those I reinterpreted in Part 1 of this series. So, despite the time and tedium involved, I shall bite the bullet and rework the missing three for Satya's sake.

Fast-forward three days and we've got our results. And, according to those results, Bg 3:11 should work out as follows:

Devotees calling to mind the sinlessness of that Divine Being for the good of all convey the supreme tool (or touchstone) for one another's benefit in attaining liberation from rebirth.

Devan (Devotees) bhavayat (calling to mind) anena (the sinlessness) te (of that) deva (divine being) bhavayantu (for the good of all) vah (convey) parasparam (the supreme tool or touchstone) bhavayantah (for one another's) sreyah (benefit or betterment) param-ava-psyatha (in liberation from rebirth)

Depending on how its syllables are split, paramavapsyatha might mean "attainment of liberation from rebirth" (param-ava-psyatha), "attainment of highest abode" (parama-va-psyatha), or "attainment of supreme congealed milk" (para-mava-psyatha). In the latter instance, "supreme congealed milk"  symbolically describes the True Perception or Holy Vision we attain through Kamadhenu's miracle-milk (the Living Water or Om/Aum vibration emanating from the Great Purusha). Whichever way we divide the syllables, the word means roughly the same thing.

Let's move to Bg 3:12, which now reads:

The inspiration to seek divine bliss dwells within the divine being granting the holy thought-offering manifesting the pure inner-radiance bestowing the Holy Inheritance (or Holy Name) accumulating possessions steals from the Souls of the Supreme Lord or Christ Self.

Iṣṭān (The inspiration) bhogānhi (to seek divine bliss) vo (dwells within) devā (the divine being) dā-syante (granting the holy or sacred ) yajña-bhāvitāḥ thought-offering manifesting) tair = taya-ra (the divine or pure inner-radiance) dattān (bestowing) apradāya (the holy inheritance) ibh (accumulating) bhuṅkte (possessions) stena (steals) eva (from the Souls of) saḥ (Sah = the Supreme Lord or Christ Self)

 And, finally, Bg 3:13 should read thusly:

Thought-offerings directed toward remembering the Wholeness of the True Self release from all errors of earthly existence they whom renounce sin by the means of developing the resolve for infinite peace of mind.

Yajna (thought-offerings) sis-tasi-nah (directed toward remembering the Wholeness) santo (of the True Self) mucyante (release from) sarvakilbasaih (all faults/errors) bhunjate (of earthly existence) te (they whom) tvagham (renounce) papa (sin, guilt, evil) ye (by the means of) pacant (ripening, maturing, or developing) yatmaka-rahat (the resolve for infinite peace of mind)

Let's now string together our six remastered Gita verses and see what we've got.

(10) Together with the strength of Wholeness, the Living Beings created the Temple-Voice of the Son of God's sinlessness to bring forward the desire to choose the Higher Self dwelling within the Amen (the Name of God) inspiring Kamadhuk (the miracle-cow also called Kamdhenu).

(11) Devotees calling to mind the sinlessness of that Divine Being for the good of all convey the supreme tool (or touchstone) for one another's benefit in attaining liberation from rebirth.

(12) The inspiration to seek divine bliss dwells within the divine being granting the holy thought-offering manifesting the pure inner-radiance bestowing the Holy Inheritance (or Holy Name) accumulating possessions steals from the Souls of the Supreme Lord or Christ Self.

(13) Thought-offerings directed toward remembering the Wholeness of the True Self release from all errors of earthly existence they whom renounce sin by the means of developing the resolve for infinite peace of mind.

(14) From purest mind in the present moment, all God-created beings offer a rainlike vibration generated through right-minded oblations. From these sacred offerings comes into being and makes possible the activity of Yanjnat (Lord Vishnu, the preserver of Creation's Wholeness).

(15) Through the action of praising God in this way, do we come to know the Sacred Syllable Om; and from that all-pervading and eternal thought-offering, everything is established in truth.

(16) In this way, Arjuna, the fettered Soul causes the wheel (of Karma) to turn (in reverse) by exchanging, through airborne extension, the choice for fear, misery, sensual pleasures, and uncertainty for the choice to return to the all-pervading eternal and divine source of its being.

Wow, so ... very different from how this section of the Bhavagad Gita has been traditionally translated, and yet now much nearer in ideology to the Rig Veda, the Holy Bible, and the Course -- when the whole ungodly idea of sacrifice as a desirable religious practice or rite is ripped out of all these sacred texts by the roots (as it must be on the journey to awakening).

You might have noticed that I parenthetically added "in reverse" to my translation of Bg 3:16. That's because, like an analog clock, the Wheel of Karma moves forward in time as long as we accumulate karmic "gifts" (by thinking egoically about others). To escape the dream, we need to clear the Karmic Record. We must, in other words, strive to live within "a zero-Karma footprint." 

How do we achieve and maintain a zero-Karma footprint? Through a two-step process. First, we must expunge the inventory of "gifts" we've accumulated over many lifetimes. And then we must strive to avoid generating any new "gifts."

Stated another way, we must endeavor to turn back the Wheel of Time until we reach "the beginning" -- the faultless State of Wholeness/Holiness we experienced before the "fall from grace." Two practices that help toward this end are "akarma" or "conscious non-doing" and True Forgiveness (both of which Course-Jesus assiduously advocates). In the simplest sense, True Forgiveness clears the record of "gifts" already accumulated, while "akarma" forestalls the accumulation of new ones. When yogis and sages speak about "reversing the Wheel of Karma" this is more or less what they mean. And, just so we're uber-clear, the "yajnas" or Golden Circle miracle-exchanges described in the Course, Rig Veda, and Bhagavad Gita ARE how we practice True Forgiveness and remember the Wholeness/Holiness of the True Self enveloping the All in All.

On that auspicious note, let me close today's discussion. And no, we didn't talk about the symbolism associated with "agni," as promised at the end of Part 2. But we will the next time we meet outside the Golden Circle. So, do come back for the next truth-illuminating installment.

Until then, Namaste and God Bless.

Yoking the Mind to God's

 

The Sanskrit word “Yoga” first appeared in the Katha Upanishad, a sacred Hindu text dating back somewhere between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE. The word means “yoke,” as in the collar a farmer might use to hitch two animals to a plow or cart. The yoke not only joins the beasts together, it also combines their strength, unites them in purpose, and lightens the workload of both.

Thus, by “yoking” our minds to God, we share our Creator’s Strength, Purpose, and Will. In doing this, we lessen the pain and suffering we manifest through wrong-minded thinking and wishing. By yoking our minds to God’s, we also become the Holy Spirit’s messengers, light-bearers, and miracle-workers.

While the latter isn’t a specific goal of most schools of Yoga, it IS what Jesus refers to in Matthew 11:28-30, when he says:

Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.

In the Course, Jesus clarifies his meaning as follows:

Remember that “yoke” means “join together,” and “burden” means message. Let us reconsider the biblical statement “my yoke is easy and my burden light” in this way. Let us join together, for my message is Light.

According to Dictionary.com, the word “burden” can, in fact, mean “the main point, message, or idea.” Thus, what Jesus intended to convey in Matthew 11:28-30 is exactly what he teaches in the Course: to extend our Inner-Light or Holiness into the world, we must join together at the level of mind. We must, in other words, “yoke” our minds together in Holy Relationship to extend God’s Saving Grace into the ego-deluded minds of our brothers.

This is, Jesus tells us repeatedly, the ONLY way to save the world. Trying to change anything at the level of form is a complete waste of time, he also explains, because everything we perceive “out there” is nothing more than the symbolic projections of what’s in our minds.

Change our perceptions and the projection will disappear. Poof – gone and forgiven in a Holy Instant.

Since the word first appeared in the Katha Upanishad, many different schools and philosophies of Yoga have sprung up all over the world. And, as with all forms of the Holy Spirit’s curriculum, each subsequent revision of “Yoga” twisted the core truths a little bit more until we ended up with “Hot Yoga” and even (God help us) “Goat Yoga.” These bizarre methods may be “therapeutic” on some level – insofar as the Ego Mind defines “therapy” – but they have nothing whatsoever to do with yoking the mind to God’s. Neither do they honor the EIGHT LIMBS first prescribed in the original Hindu texts describing the theory and practice of Yoga.

As stated at the start of this post, the earliest of those texts is the Katha Upanishad. One of the mukhya, primary, or first twelve Upanishads of Hinduism, the Katha takes the form of a dialog or conversation between a boy named Nachiketa, who is the son of a sage, and a deity called Yama. In Hinduism, Yama is understood to be the God of Death, the Keeper of the Karmic Record, the King of Justice who decides where Souls go after death, and the guardian spirit of the Southern Direction. In the Book of Revelations, Yama is, I believe, the rider on the black horse who carries the scales of justice. In the vision described in the New Testament, he is, however, associated with famine (scarcity) rather than death.

In the Katha Upanishad, the conversation between Nachiketa and Yama evolves to a discussion of the nature of man, knowledge, Atman or Higher Self, and Moksha (liberation of the Atman). One of the most widely studied Hindu texts, the Katha Upanishad asserts (like Jesus) that “Atman (Soul/Higher Self) exists” and that seeking knowledge of that Higher Self is both the intended purpose of mortal existence and the path to “Highest Bliss.” These ideas (rightly) contradict Buddhism’s assertions that “Soul, Self does not exist” and one should seek “Emptiness (Śūnyatā), which is Highest Bliss.” The detailed teachings of the Katha Upanishad have been paradoxically interpreted as Dvaita (dualistic) and Advaita (non-dualistic).

The second-oldest text advocating the practice of Yoga is the Bhagavad Gita or “Song of God.” Like the Song of Songs in the Hebrew Bible, The Gita takes the form of an epic poem. Also like the Song of Songs (and most scriptural texts), The Gita is allegorical in nature. Dated to around 500 BCE (roughly the time of Haggai and Zechariah), the narrative verse is part of the Mahabharata, one of two major epics of ancient Indian history and/or mythology. The other is the Rāmāyaṇa. Like the Bible stories about the two temples, the Mahabharata appears to chronicle historical events, but is ACTUALLY an allegorical explanation of how the separation came about and will one day be resolved.

Like the Katha Upanishad, The Gita takes the form of a conversation between two characters – in this case, Prince Arjuna and Lord Krishna – a deific character who has helped the prince’s family out of various scrapes over many generations. The dialog takes place on the edge of a battlefield. The battle taking place is a “righteous” war between the Pandavas and Kauravas – the two families discussed in the Mahabharata. A Pandava, Prince Arjuna has arrived at the scene in his chariot, which is driven by Krishna.

As the narrative opens, Arjuna is conflicted over joining the battle. On the one hand, he feels obligated to help his family; on the other, he despairs over the violence and death he might cause, witness, and/or experience. Immobilized by indecision, the Prince seeks the counsel of Krishna. In Course terms, Arjuna stands at “the branch in the road,” unsure which way to go. In the ensuing verses, Krishna advises the Prince on a broad range of topics related to the theory and practice of Yoga.

The battlefield setting – together with his role as charioteer – casts Krishna as the “Christ-as-warrior” figure in the epic. More accurately, Krishna plays the “guru” who teaches Arjuna how to become a spiritual warrior.

Before we go deeper into the teachings, let me just say that of all the spiritual texts I’ve read thus far, The Gita comes closest to the Course in spirit. In Chapter Six, for example, Krishna explains to Arjuna that meditation, which trains the mind to overcome the enemies of mita (limitation) and chitta (ego-learning and conditioning), is a spiritual warrior’s most powerful weapon. Asceticism, meanwhile, does nothing to bulwark the Higher Mind against attack from the lower mind. These ideas agree with the Course, which also advocates “going within” to undo the limitations imposed by the Ego Mind’s thought-system and conditioning. Like Krishna, Jesus also says asceticism – a predominantly bodily discipline based on sacrifice – is a waste of time. Training the mind to silence the Ego’s endless chattering is, he tells us, a more productive spiritual practice.

Krishna goes on to explain yoga sādhanā – the spiritual methods for reuniting the mind with God. A sādhak or yogi, he tells Arjuna, should strive to keep the mind as steady in meditation as a flame or lamp in a windless place. This is, in fact, a great and useful metaphor, which I refer to often while meditating. Thusly restraining the mind is difficult, Krishna acknowledges, but not impossible with dedicated practice. Whenever the mind wanders, we simply must bring it back to the object of meditation: "yoking" our mind with God’s. Through this practice, says Krishna, the mind gradually becomes purified enough to enable transcendence.

When Arjuna asks what happens to those who fail to steady their minds in this way, Krishna assures him that anyone who strives to commune with God will eventually achieve the goal. Jesus also says this in Workbook Lesson 131 (No one can fail who asks to reach the truth), among other places in the Course.

Krishna then explains that God keeps track of our spiritual progress in each life. With each new incarnation, we start out where we left off in the last one. Like grade-levels in school, we advance with each subsequent “term” (lifetime) until we graduate. In The Disappearance of the Universe, the Ascended Masters who dictated the book confirm that this is indeed how the at-one-ment system works. In a future post, I’ll explain how the Powers That Be (not God per se) track our curricular progress.

Chapter Six of The Gita ends with Krishna telling Arjuna that a yogi (one who strives to unite with God) is superior to the ascetic (tapasvī), the scriptural scholar (jñānī), and the ritual-focused worshiper (karmī). The highest among all the yogis, he then adds, is the one who engages in loving devotion to God (bhakti) and fulfills his duty to uphold right order (dharma) through “selfless action.”

What Krishna means by “selfless action” is activity motivated by spiritual guidance rather than by the false or ego self. Spirit-motivated action is, in fact, the ONLY kind that does NOT generate karma -- the by-product of our belief in guilt. As Hinduism correctly teaches, karma – both good and bad – binds us to the Wheel of Rebirth. To hop off the wheel – i.e., graduate from the Atonement Academy the world actually is – we must expunge the Karmic Record. We must, in other words, owe or be owed nothing in the Great Deceiver’s Ledger of Accounts. And yes, the Course says pretty much the same thing in a slightly more round-about way.

How do we efface our karmic debts? The short answer is: by seeing ourselves and all other lifeforms ONLY as the Pure, Holy, and Innocent Son of God. The longer answer is: through the joint practice of True Forgiveness and Non-Action or Yoga-Nidra. True Forgiveness erases our old debts (guilt from the past), while Yoga-Nidra prevents the accumulation of new debts and/or credits (guilt in the future). What is Yoga-Nidra? NOT what most modern-day yogis believe. What Yoga-Nidra actually entails is doing NOTHING in the world of form without direct spiritual impetus. And yes, the Course also advocates this practice, in a slightly more round-about way. I’ll talk more about Yoga-Nidra in the next post.

For now, let’s get back to The Gita. In many other chapters of this must-read manual for awakening, Krishna discusses the three Gunas or “modes of existence” we covered briefly in the post on Hinduism. In case you’ve forgotten, they are Sattva (pure and good), Rajas (egoic and selfish), and Tamas (evil and destructive). These three energies, as I said, are woven into and color everything in Brahmanda. They are also the forces that drive and influence each individual’s personality, emotions, thoughts, world view, and actions.

Presumably, the Gunas of Hinduism represent the three phases of “undoing” or “corrective learning” the Elohim powers guide the Buddhi through as it climbs the chakra-ladder. Thus, we might compare the Gunas to elementary school (Tamas), high school (Rajas), and college (Sattva). To overcome the perception of duality on every level, Krishna tells Arjuna, he must rise above ALL three Gunas (like the Gods). What he means is that the Buddhi can be taught to be pure, good, and pious, but it can’t rise above the lower mind, to which it belongs. To attain liberation, the Atman or Soul must transcend Buddhi/Ego Consciousness and all its modes of learning in favor of Atmic Consciousness.

We must, in other words, strip away the Buddhi aspect of the Ego Mind in order to rise (on the ladder of consciousness) to the Atmic Plane. Rightly understood, killing the Buddhi also frees us from the ego-constructed self-concept. This, in turn, allows the purified Soul to emerge from the Cosmic Egg or Chrysalis. It then “flies up” to the Fifth Plane of Consciousness, where the Holy Spirit dwells within us.

Let’s now move on from The Gita to another highly revered text describing the theory and practice of Yoga: The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. A few hundred years newer than The Gita, The Yoga Sutras were compiled over many centuries either by various sages using a common pseudonym or by an avatar living in the world for many lifetimes.

In Hinduism, the word “avatar” describes a manifested deity, a released Soul in bodily form on earth, and/or an incarnate divine teacher. Basically, they are the Teachers of Teachers described in the Course's Manual for Teachers.

The Sutras are deliberately vague and esoteric, as the Course can also be. Like many esoteric texts, both reveal more as our minds open to the Higher Truths they impart. Also like many esoteric texts, The Sutras suffer from poor translation and unilluminated interpretation. In what follows, therefore, I will stay as true as possible to the original wording of the teachings and the meaning of that wording when The Sutras were written.

Early in The Sutras, Patanjali defines Yoga as “the cessation of the fluctuations of the mind, so that the Seer or Buddhi comes to know Itself and abide in Its own real, fundamental nature.” These undesirable fluctuations, he then explains, result from four lower-mind afflictions and/or distractions, which fall under the general heading of “ignorance.”

These four afflictions/distractions are:

1) “I-am-ness” or individual identity
2) Worldly desires
3) Aversions or fears
4) Attachment to physical possessions and pleasures

Patanjali then says:

The afflictions are to be suppressed by meditation. The suppression of distracting vrittis [thoughts] is attained by abhyasa and non-attachment. That suffering which has not yet come can be warded off. The cause of that suffering which should be warded off is the entanglement of the Seer with the seen. The problem is solved by getting established in samādhi, which is liberation. The seen consists of the elements and the sense organs. It is of the nature of Prakrti. Its purpose is experience and liberation of the jiva. The seen is for the purpose of serving Purusha.

First, let me say that what Patanjali describes agrees 100 percent with the Course. Second, let me define the new Sanskrit terms he uses and review the ones we already know.

—Seer and Buddhi, as I’ve explained, both refer to the observer or “witness” aspect of the dreaming mind that can recognize and choose between right-minded and wrong-minded thoughts and perceptions. Opinions differ as to whether the Buddhi is attached to the Ego Mind or to the Higher Mind. I believe it’s part of the egoic intellect, while Patanjali seems to be of the other opinion.

—Purusha can mean many things, depending on the source. For our purposes, it refers to the guiding Divinity, Holiness, Light, or Holy Spirit dwelling within the Spiritual Body or Higher Mind channel.

—Jiva means the same as Atman. It is, therefore, the Soul or Divine Spark of Creation within each person/persona. That Spark, Soul, or Jiva is the only part of us that God created and, therefore, the only part that’s real.

—Abhyasa refers to making regular efforts over a long period of time to maintain outside meditation the stillness and peace acquired in meditation. We establish peace and stillness in meditation by being present in the now-moment and focusing on God. So, abhyasa means practicing being in the moment and focusing on God when we’re not meditating, as well as when we are. Krishna also recommends abhyasa in The Gita, as Jesus does in the Course when he instructs us to practice the Holy Instant. The now-moment embodies the Holy Instant, through which we reconnect or “yoke” our minds back together with Eternity and God.

—Patanjali also mentions non-attachment or vairagya as an essential means of controlling the mind. Vairagya roughly translates as dispassion or detachment from the pains and pleasures of the material world. Two sides of the same coin, pain and pleasure arise from our attachment to or desire for “specialness” and the Ego Mind’s worthless temptations and miscreations. We detach ourselves from these desires not by giving anything up, but by coming to realize they have no value to the Spiritual Being we really are. They are, in fact, undesirable obstacles to achieving liberation. When we reach this point on the journey, we gladly give up these unwanted desires and attachments. Vairagya then becomes a matter of willing SURRENDER rather than unwilling SACRIFICE. Jesus describes the practice of vairagya throughout the Course, but especially in Workbook Lesson 133: I will not value what is valueless.

—As previously discussed, Prakṛti includes all the cognitive, moral, psychological, emotional, sensorial, and physical aspects of the illusory world and universe. It is the substance of everything within the illusion, Material World, or Cosmic Egg. When Patanjali says, the purpose of Prakrti is experience and liberation of the jiva, he means the visible world exists BOTH so we can experience “specialness” AND so the Holy Spirit can cure us of that insane desire. When he says, “the seen is for the purpose of serving Purusha,” he is affirming that the illusion's primary purpose is to heal the separation.

Patanjali packed a lot of meaning into that brief paragraph, didn’t he? What he’s essentially explaining is that the illusion exists to liberate the Higher Self from the illusion. It’s a school, in other words, for the Soul's deliverance from lower-mind miscreating. He also clarifies that the three best practices for detaching the jiva from the illusion are abhyasa, vairagya, and establishing ourselves in samādhi.

Jesus says the same thing in fewer words when he extols us, in the Bible and the Course, to “Seek God and His Kingdom – and nothing else.”

In the next few stanzas of The Sutras, Patanjali tells us that, to overcome the afflictions/distractions of “ignorance,” we also must purify our minds through the practices of tapah, japa, and bhakti. Since we’ve already covered bhakti (loving devotion to God), let’s explore the meaning of the other two Sanskrit terms.

Because tapah is often translated as “penance” or “austerity,” many schools of Yoga advocate asceticism (which Krishna and Jesus BOTH say is both unnecessary and pointless). In actuality, the word means “atonement.” When Patanjali wrote The Sutras, the word “penance” wasn’t associated with punishment, suffering, and sacrifice. Derived from the Latin word paenitentia, “penance” originally meant a change of mind, regret over an action, or the desire to be forgiven. Only centuries later, owing to misconceptions of “sin” perpetuated by the Ego’s religions, did the word "penance" take on negative connotations. Tapah, then, merely means the desire to live simply and contentedly, which is possible only when we are free of the burdens of guilt, resentment, and lower-mind desires, prejudices, and conditioning.

As I briefly explained in the post on the Tridevi, japa refers to the meditative repetition of a mantra or divine name. Silently chanting Aum or Om is the japa Patanjali recommends. In the Workbook for Students (Lesson 183), Jesus instructs us to repeat “the name we share with God” in meditation. He also, therefore, recommends the practice of japa. (Oddly, that critical lesson seems to be missing from the online edition of the URText). 

Is Aum/Om the name we share with God? Aum/Om is certainly ONE of the names, but not necessarily the one advocated by Jesus. What name does Jesus want us to repeat? We’ll get to that in due time, I promise.

The practice of japa isn’t just about repeating a word or name, however; it’s about summoning into our minds the Pure Presence or Holy Power that name or word represents. Technically speaking, it’s a highly effective form of prayer -- perhaps the MOST effective form, in fact. Being an onomatopoeia of the Cosmic Force, Aum/Om is a symbol for Grace. Aum/Om also mimics the vibratory tone of the Lamed or Christ Power of Elohim. Repeating Aum/Om, therefore, achieves two objectives. The first is that it “yokes” our Divine Spark or Lesser Light to the Christ or Greater Light, thereby increasing the flow of Grace, Manna, or Soma/Amrita into our minds. That Grace, Manna, or Soma/Amrita is the strength and sustenance that enables the Soul to see through the illusion and find the Way or Tao. Thus, the more Grace, Manna, or Soma/Amrita we take into our Inner-Instrument, the quicker we open the Soul's Spiritual Eye. And the quicker we open the Soul's Spiritual Eye, the quicker we move to the Atmic Plane. The second benefit of repeating Aum/Om in the silence of meditation is that doing so gradually re-tunes our vibration to the same frequency as the Lamed or Christ power.

Makes sense, right?

Okay, so … according to Patanjali, the practice of Yoga consists of three activities which purify the Higher Mind of the lower-mind’s imprisoning “ignorance.” These practices, when correctly understood, are:

Tapah = Changing our mind about the way we think and live, atoning for our past errors, and letting go of all our worldly and bodily desires

Japa = Repeating a name or mantra to invoke the Holy Presence, power, or vibratory tone the name or mantra symbolizes

Bhakti = Demonstrating loving devotion to God in thought, word, and deed -- or, in the words of Jesus, loving God with all our hearts, minds, and Souls

 

From here, Patanjali goes on to describe the eight “limbs” or practices that free us from the ignorance brought on by Prakrti. Boiled down to essentials, those eight limbs are:

Yama (restraint) the five DON'Ts of Yoga, which are: 1) Ahimsa: doing violence, harm, or injury to any living thing; 2) Satya: dishonesty, inauthenticity, or inconsistency in word, deed, or thought; 3) Ateya: taking or coveting what isn’t ours; 4) Brahmacharya: attachment to worldly desires and sensual pleasures, especially sexual lust; and 5) Aparigrapha: being possessive, greedy, selfish, or materialistic.

Niyama (observance), the five DOs of Yoga, which are 1) Shaucha: purity of thought; 2) Santosha: contentment, peacefulness; 3) Tapah: austerity and practical (results-producing) spiritual discipline; 4) Swadhyaya: spiritual self-study; and 5) Ishwarapranid-hana: offering one’s life to God.

Asana (posture), which means to adopt a sitting meditation posture that’s comfortable, sustainable, and effective – NOT mastering "poses" with names like “downward-facing dog” and the like.

Pranayama (breath control), which means refining the breath in meditation until it’s subtle, inward, smooth, and regulated. When my inner-guru told me to repeat “Om” (pronounced “O”) in a continuous loop with the breath, s/he was instructing me in the TRUE practice of pranayama. I’m sorry to shatter anyone's illusions (actually, I'm not), but fire-breathing, breathing through alternating nostrils, and other such body-oriented “pranayama” technique are ineffective egoic deceptions.

Pratyahara (sense withdrawal), which means turning the awareness inward, toward the mind and away from the body’s senses.

Dharana (concentration), which means fixing the mind on a single thought, mantra, or sound, and the visual focus on a particular area or point, such as the tip of the nose or between the eyebrows.

Dhyana (meditation), which Patanjali defines as “the uninterrupted flow of the mind – the content of the consciousness – in a single and unbroken stream.” Adi Shankara, the founder of Vedanta Advaita, describes dhyana as “a stream of identical vritti [thoughts] as a unity, a continuity of vrittis not disturbed by intrusion of differing or opposing vrittis.” So, dhyana is the practice of focusing the mind or “meditating” on a single thought, mantra, name, affirmation, or sound until that thought, mantra, affirmation, or sound blocks all other distracting thoughts and sounds. This is, essentially, what the Course’s Workbook for Students trains us to do (and also the practice Jesus describes in Workbook Lesson 183).

Samādhi (communion) is oneness with Spirit, the highest step on the Eightfold Path of Yoga. It is the unification of the meditator, the process of meditation, and the object of meditation, which is yoking our mind to God’s. To attain samādhi, we must withdraw the mind from the physical senses until the Ego dissolves, freeing the Soul to float upwards into the higher waters of Spirit. Jesus describes this experience in the Course, but I can't seem to find the citation at present.

Does Jesus teach any of these “limbs” in the Course? Oh, yes. He teaches all but pranayama — the only "limb" devoted more to physical activity than to mental stillness. And, as I’ve explained, the Holy Spirit instructed me in the true practice of pranayama in meditation. Being of the body, which exists on the lowest and densest plane or dimension of mind, the breath is NOT the great channel of spiritual energy many teachers and paths make it out to be. Breathing exercises during meditation do, however, help build focus and concentration (dharana). That is, in fact, their only useful purpose as a spiritual practice.

Real Breath is Neshama — the Inner-Divinity embodied by the Presence of God and Christ. This breath, which is Grace, Manna, or Soma/Amrita (as opposed to prana or chi), we draw in NOT through the corporeal body’s nose, mouth, or lungs, but through the psychic nadis of the Spiritual Body.

That Jesus studied Yoga in India during some of the years unaccounted for in the canonical gospels is documented in various ancient records. It has also been confirmed in several reliable books, including The Yoga of Jesus by Paramahansa Yogananda, Jesus in India by Mizra Ghulam Ahmadin, The Lifetimes When Jesus and the Buddha Knew Each Other by Gary Renard, and The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ by Levi Dowling. It should come as no surprise, then, that Christ’s teachings in both the New Testament and the Course incorporate many elements of Yoga.

When pared down to fundamentals, the Course revolves around seven “limbs” or central teachings, which are:

Right-Minded Reality, which we achieve by recognizing that the world we perceive is a dream, because only the Eternal and Perfect is of God. 

Right-Minded Choice & Desire, which we achieve by choosing the Holy Spirit’s thought-system over the Ego’s and desiring ONLY to return to God. In so doing, we cease abusing our God-given free will. In the process, we also must accept at-one-ment as the only purpose of life and deny the Ego Mind’s false opposites, dark daevas, and false idols.

Right-Minded Will & Strength, which we achieve by realigning our wills with God’s and choosing His Absolute Strength and Power over the Ego’s little and limiting substitutes. We also must relinquish our ego-instilled desires for “specialness,” individual glory, materialistic goals, and worldly power. 

Right-Minded Truth & Illumination, which we achieve by asking the Holy Spirit to correct our inverted perceptions, egoic judgments, and wrong-minded impulses. We also must seek and follow the Holy Spirit’s guidance exclusively, as well as value and seek Higher Truth and Illumination over the Ego Mind’s inferior intellectual “wisdom” and distractions. 

Right-Minded Authorship & Devotion, which we achieve by embracing our superior True Identity as the One Soul God created “in the beginning,” and withdrawing our investment in the false and inferior concepts of our “selves” as individuals and bodies. Eventually, we must release all our attachments to our egoic sense of “I-am-ness” and recognize our Oneness with God and all aspects of Creation. We also must revere God above the Ego’s false idols and worthless miscreations. Eventually, we must consistently demonstrate loving devotion to God and His Creations in thought, word, and deed.

Right-Minded Thought & Forgiveness, which we achieve, with the Holy Spirit’s help, by first owning and then extending our God-given Creative Will and Powers. To clear the Karmic Record, which binds us to the dream, we also must practice True Forgiveness and the Golden Rule in all our dealings with other people. 

Right-Minded Relationships, Sharing & Service, which we achieve by asking the Holy Spirit to transform all our relationships from “special” to “holy” – or from separate to one. We begin the process by striving to perceive our relationships only as mirrors of our thought-errors, teaching-learning assignments, and vehicles for seeing the Face of Christ in each other. As we advance, we begin to envision joining with other Souls to extend healing thought-gifts of Grace (i.e., Miracles) into the world, under the watchful eye of the Christ Presence. Gradually, we move from the physical world into that mental world more and more until we live there most of the time. In the Course, Jesus calls that “mental world” by many names, including the Golden Circle, the Holy Meeting Place, the Ark of Safety, the Holy Relationship, and the Real World.

Jesus may not use Sanskrit words like Purusha, yama, bhakti, or japa in his Course, but he absolutely teaches the same ideas. Truth is truth, after all, whatever form or language it may be packaged within.

Like all the other Spiritual Truths the Evil One gets its slimy paws on, the original teachings of Yoga and Hinduism have been mucked with over time. That’s why I’ve used the root sources whenever possible – and also why I investigated the scriptural and etymological origins of certain ideas, words, and phrases.

Some newer schools of Yoga claim, for example, that enlightenment can be attained “scientifically” -- i.e., without believing in a Higher Power. Buddhism and Theosophy also promote this preposterous notion to some extent.

The Gita, the Yoga Sutras, the Bible, and the Course all state very clearly that loving devotion to God (bhakti) is an essential practice for those seeking salvation. We also must uphold Higher Truth in thought, word, and deed (dharma), turn our lives over to God (Ishwarapranid-hana), and yoke our will to God’s (samādhi). How, then, can it be possible to achieve enlightenment without believing in God? To presume we can join or surrender to something we deny exists is patently absurd ego nonsense, pure and simple.

Or, as Jesus says:

Only if you ACCEPT the Fatherhood of God will you have anything, because His Fatherhood GAVE you everything. That is why to deny Him IS to deny yourself. Arrogance is the denial of love, because love shares and arrogance withholds. As long as both appear to you to be desirable, the concept of choice, which is not of God, will remain with you. While this is not true in Eternity, it IS true in time, so that, while time lasts in YOUR minds, there WILL be choices. Time itself WAS your choice. If you would remember Eternity, you must learn to look on only the Eternal. If you allow yourselves to become preoccupied with the temporal, you are LIVING IN TIME. As always, your choice is determined by what you value. Time and Eternity cannot both be real, because they contradict each other. If you will accept only what is timeless as real, you will begin to understand Eternity, and make it yours.

 

It is equally ridiculous to believe we can achieve enlightenment – or any form of inner-peace – without turning inward on a regular basis. Like Yoga, the Course is a path of meditative mind-training. The Workbook for Students provides the progressive meditative exercises required to align our thinking with the theoretical ideas presented in the Text and Manual for Teachers. Unlike Yoga, the Course excludes the body COMPLETELY from the reawakening process – except as a communications vehicle for the Holy Spirit. With regard to meditative postures, the only instruction Jesus offers is to sit up while doing the lessons to avoid falling asleep.

In future posts, I’ll compare what Jesus and Patanjali each say about meditation, continue our discussion of "yoking" in the context of relationships, and explore the concept of Yoga-Nidra, which ancient Chinese philosophers called "Wu-Weu" -- the spiritual discipline of doing nothing at the level of form. In the next few, however, we're going to switch gears and return to the Old Testament to explore what the often-discussed "temple" and "lampstand" actually signify.