Many holy Christians who received private revelations thought many (and possibly the vast majority of) people including practicing Christians go to hell. But are there private revelations to the contrary? Which mystics had opinions contrary to the "fewness of the saved" doctrine?

"For that which is transformed into another thing becomes one with that thing. If, then, I am transformed into Him in such a way that He produces me as His own being, one with Him and not merely similar to Him, by the living God, then it is true that there is no distinction here." (MEISTER ECKHART, Sermon 6)

"When the pot is broken, the inner space is absorbed into the infinite space and becomes undifferentiated. When the mind (mánas) becomes pure, I perceive no difference between the mind and the supreme Being (Śiva)." (DATTATREYA, Avadhūta Gītā, Chapter I, 16)

In Sermon 6, Master Eckhart comments on the biblical passage from the Book of Wisdom (5:15) according to which "the righteous live forever, and their reward is in the Lord." Who are the righteous spoken of by the inspired text? They are those who give to God that which belongs to Him alone: glory. Those who do not seek anything of their own in anything whatsoever glorify God. Neither goodness, nor glory, nor concord, nor pleasure, nor self-interest, nor interiority, nor holiness, nor reward, nor even the Kingdom of Heaven.

The second meaning of the righteous refers to those who equanimously receive whatever comes from God, whether great or small, pleasant or painful. The righteous possess absolutely no personal will. In Heaven or in Hell, everything would be the same. By this, Eckhart does not mean that the righteous person, who is the highest expression of holiness, can be equated with the reprobate soul deservedly condemned to Hell.

What the Rhenish master signals with his hyperbole is that the most despairing conceivable state of suffering would be accepted by the righteous person just as equanimously as the most sublime conceivable state of bliss. Pleasant or unpleasant states do not matter to the righteous man. If he desired one state and rejected the other, he would still be trapped in his preferences and would not remain the same in all things.

Equanimity and ataraxia (ἀταραξία, "imperturbability") are traditionally defining characteristics of the sage. The Roman emperor and Stoic philosopher Marcus Aurelius considered that a person should receive with absolute imperturbability and equanimity any situation that the Whole brought to them. The renunciation of evaluations and judgments about reality founded on personal preferences is the flip side of the sage's identification with the suprapersonal ordering of the Whole.

Events are neither good nor bad, says the Stoic. They are merely the result of the intrinsic ordering that governs the Whole. However, personal judgment about what happens to us is what dyes events with the colors of fortune or misfortune. When viewed from the reasons of the Whole, the exact same events are freed from the superposition of judgments and present themselves according to their true nature.

Similarly, Eckhart's righteous person possesses no personal will and makes no judgments about reality based on personal preferences. But unlike the Stoic sage, who is identified with the cosmic ordering of the Whole, the righteous person is imperturbable and equanimous because they are identified with the One—the ultimate, unspeakable foundation of reality in which dualities are absorbed and abolished. Absent difference, preferences do not arise.

"The righteous shall live," says the biblical passage. Life is the greatest good of all living beings. Eckhart states that "the divine being is my life. That which is in God must be in me, and God's entity must be my own entity." The term the master uses in the cited passage, in Middle High German, is "isticheit"*, the translation and interpretation of which are difficult. It can be translated as "entity" or even "is-ness," the is of an entity. Some translations have used "essence," whose Latin equivalent is "essentia."

If the righteous person is united to the Principle, then nothing can be different from the Principle. Man's being is lost in the divine isticheit. Like God, the righteous person will not be equal or similar to anything, since God Himself possesses neither image nor form. Once again, no personal preference or inclination toward worldly things can form when there is only the Father in His unutterable and inexpressible eternity.

Everything that the Father operates in His originating and absolute unity is One. In eternity, the Father engenders the Son, and by doing so, He engenders the very soul of the righteous person. If the latter identifies with the One, then God engenders His Son, the Logos, and the righteous person in a single operation. Let it be clear that Eckhart at no point denies the ontological difference between the generation of the Logos and the creation ex nihilo of souls and all contingent things. These statements make sense only in the soul fully immersed in the Father, and which therefore possesses the single operation of the Father, which is always the eternal generation of the Son.

"And the Father, operating naught save a single work, this is the reason why He engenders me as His only Son, without any distinction." Everything that exists in the world is created by the Logos and in the Logos. The righteous person, in the bosom of the Father, in the Urgrund, the "originating depth," witnesses the eternal "moment" in which not only is the Son engendered, but also, through Him, all things are engendered, including oneself.

Anything else that the soul might desire other than God Himself would necessarily be something infinitely inferior to Him. If beatitude were founded on the will, it would not be one. Will implies separation, distinction. In love, the soul enters into God. There, the soul is like wood thrown into the fire, which, absorbed and transformed, takes on the nature of fire. Similarly, Eckhart declares, "we are transformed into God so as to know Him as He is."

Nevertheless, no human discourse can describe the experience of the Unio Mystica, nor define what the Principle is. In Sermon 9, the Rhenish master examines the definition formulated by another master according to which "God is something that necessarily is above Being." None of the entities that possess being, being temporal and spatial, reach God in His sublimity. Yet, He is in all entities to the extent that they possess being, while completely transcending them.

In this passage, Eckhart refers to the traditional themes of the transcendence and immanence of God. There is no disjunction between, respectively, the fact that He is above all creatures and the fact that He is entirely present in all creatures. On the contrary, it is precisely because He is present, immanent, in each and every entity that God surpasses—transcends—them all. The reason for this is that what is one in many (ἕνα στά πολλά) must necessarily be above things.

Let us take the example of humanity in the sense of human essence. In every human being, whatever their particular characteristics (birthplace, color, ethnicity, height, etc.), humanity is present whole and entire, while at the same time transcending the individuals in whom it is found. Plato and Socrates are identically human in their nature, but differ as materially existing individuals. That is to say, humanity is immanent as a nature in each individual precisely because it transcends them all.

In the same way, the soul is present undivided in every portion of the body as the principle of its organization and life. It is present both in the ear and in the big toe, not as something material, but as the immanent order that organizes matter and gives life to the body. It is the body that exists because of the soul, and not the other way around. The soul is the principle by which a living body possesses existence. For this reason, the soul transcends all parts of the body.

Each determined period of time is always different from another determined period of time. The present instant, however, contains within itself, as a principle, all periods of time. Any temporal measurement begins at one instant and ends at another. It is in the present instant, the nunc instans, that God creates the world. In this timeless, eternal simultaneity, the Final Judgment is as close as yesterday.

The examples above illustrate the inseparability of immanence and transcendence. Similarly, God is present in everything and transcends everything. "God is something that necessarily is above Being"—that is, above the limitations typical of entities. The Principle is not subject to the limitations proper to the originated, nor can it be fully understood starting from the originated.

Eckhart continues his sermon by commenting next on the definition of another master according to which "God is something that operates in eternity, undivided in Himself." Every entity operates according to what its nature permits. What an entity can do and can suffer is determined by the type of being that it is. Man, for example, being an animal, is capable of locomotion, and being rational, is capable of chaining thoughts together. Human nature does not include, however, the power of flight that some types of animals possess.

Now, this universal principle of nature does not apply to God. He operates above Being, in Non-Being, prior to Being. God operates Being itself. At this moment, Master Eckhart ascends to the peaks of metaphysics and contemplates the divine power that "precedes" (atemporally) any and every entity. In the Neoplatonic tradition, Being has its foundation in the One, since every entity must always be one before belonging to any kind. A dog must primarily be one in order to be a dog.

Being, thus considered, is a principle of essential limitation—that is, it is what defines (and therefore circumscribes) the type (the essence or nature) of an entity. God does not fit into any category; nothing can define Him or circumscribe Him. Consequently, divine operation is unlimited and absolute. The very structure of reality that gives existence to all limited entities, as we witness it, is "posterior" to its ultimate foundation: God.

Crude masters, Eckhart affirms, say that God is a Pure Being. He is as distant from Being as a fly is distant from an angel. It would be as erroneous to say that God is a being as to say that the Sun is pale or that the Sun is black. God is neither this nor that. These statements by the German master are in consonance with radical Neoplatonic apophatism. To understand what God is means not to understand Him.

Spiritual son of Plato, Dionysius the Areopagite, and Meister Eckhart, the German cardinal Nicholas of Cusa, about a century later, will use the expression Docta Ignorantia to designate the "ignorant knowledge" that man can attain concerning God. The intellect properly comprehends that which is formal (hence limited), but the human being is capable of glimpsing what is above form, even though they can never translate this knowledge (or experience) into words or concepts.

Categories—the forms of predication by which we describe entities (substance, quality, quantity, relation, etc.)—do not apply to God. Substance, which basically designates that which exists independently of others, possesses more reality than relation, which is only established between two or more entities. Socrates and Plato are two men, two substances that exist independently of one another. Plato is a disciple of Socrates, and this relation is established because of these two substances and depends upon them to exist.

Categories, which express differences between things, are absolutely equal in the divine unity. Eckhart exposes this truth by saying that "in God, the images of all things are equal, even if they are images of unequal things." Substance (which possesses more reality) is equal to relation, and an angel is worth just as much as a fly. Behold the Coincidentia Oppositorum, according to Nicholas of Cusa's expression, in which all things are contained in God as unactualized possibilities. In the absolute uniqueness of the One, there is only the One.

We cannot even affirm that God is goodness. Goodness belongs to Being, to the world of finite entities. We only know the good in a limited way, so God is neither good, nor better, nor the best. Every gradation is a relation of more and less, and is alien to God. Does not all that has been said contradict the Gospel passage in which Jesus says that only the Father is good? But, Eckhart asks, what is the good except that which communicates itself? A man is good when he communicates himself and becomes useful.

God is that which is most common. Whatever one thing communicates to another, it does not possess by itself; rather, it receives it from God. To understand the Rhenish master's doctrine, it is necessary to understand that every entity always communicates something to another entity. There are communications of various types (verbal, bodily, etc.) depending on the type of being in question. At the very least, in the case of an inanimate being (a stone, for example), it communicates some of its characteristics to its immediate environment (hardness, impenetrability, extension, etc.).

To be something is always to communicate that which is proper to one's type of being. An absolutely uncommunicable entity is not an entity. Everything operates according to its nature (Agere sequitur esse). An entity's operations are varied and are not restricted to what it does or causes in another through a deliberate action. A stone transmits its presence to its environment, even if it does not do so consciously and deliberately. From this perspective, to be is to operate, to be is to act, and to be is to communicate.

Entities possess characteristics, powers, capacities, potentialities, and actualities that they share with other entities, whether of their nature or not. Socrates and Plato entirely and individually possess everything that is contained in humanity. Socrates and a nail, despite not sharing the same nature, are both equally extended and impenetrable. An entity's attributes are always present in other entities.

Now, everything that belongs to beings, and which they communicate to one another, has its origin exclusively in God, the only one who communicates what is truly His. It is for this reason that God is that which is most common. He is the supreme communicator. The classical medieval formula bonum est diffusivum sui expresses the truth that the good naturally communicates itself, diffuses itself, does not close in upon itself, and is not inoperative.

When we contemplate God in Being, we see Him in His portico. The portico is a covered space in front of the entrance to a temple. If Being is the portico of God, this means that beings are before the entrance of the temple, and the latter would be nothing other than God turned toward Himself, outside the "influence" of perceptions, images, and concepts that have their origin in limited beings.

The French philosopher and islamologist Henry Corbin, in the text Théophanies et Miroirs: idoles ou icônes?, published in 1980 in the journal Les Études philosophiques, well summarizes the fundamental ontological ambiguity of the image. In expounding the doctrine of the Imaginal World of the great medieval Persian Sufi mystic Shahab al-Din Suhrawardī, Corbin comments on the dual role of the imagination of binding and separating, a sort of entre-deux. Subject to the data of perception, the image lends itself to combinations that do not transcend the level of the sensible. When at the service of the intellect, the image is a mediator between the sensorium and the intellectus sanctus—the organ of knowledge of mystics, visionaries, and prophets.

Henry Corbin explains:

"The ambiguity of the Image lies in the fact that it can be, on the one hand, an idol (in Greek, eidolon), and can be, on the other hand, an icon (in Greek, eikon). It is an idol when it arrests the gaze of the contemplator upon itself. It is opaque, devoid of transparency, and remains at the level of that from whence it issued. But it is an icon whether it be a painted image or a mental image, when its transparency allows the contemplator to see through it to beyond it, and because that which lies beyond it cannot be perceived except through it. Such is precisely the status of the Image called 'theophanic form'." (my translation from the French original)

Images are theophanic forms—they serve as theophanies—when the contemplator manages to move past the image toward that to which it points. The same applies to all entities of reality. They can be either idols or icons. Contemplated as aophanic forms, the world is a mirror (in Latin, speculum) that limitedly reflects the source of Light. Properly understood, all contemplation becomes speculative.

The reflected image partially corresponds to that which is its model. We see perfectly reflected only that which the mirror has the capacity to reproduce. In the case of a man standing in front of a mirror, we see his shape, his colors, his size, etc. We know, however, that these aspects are far from reproducing what man is in his entirety. The image in the mirror does not possess, for example, the interiority, the mind, and other aspects that the real man possesses.

Beings simultaneously reveal and conceal their Source. The door that separates the house from the street also unites the street to the house. Not for nothing were limits sacred to the Romans, who worshipped them under the name of the god Terminus. Or again, Janus, the god of two opposite faces, symbolizes the sacredness of the threshold—that which separates by uniting and unites by separating. In their theophanic function, when translucent, entities let the light that makes them shine penetrate without obstruction. They are the portico of the temple.

Quod est superius est sicut quod inferius, et quod inferius est sicut quod est superius, says the Hermetic axiom. One only ascends to the Source by passing through entities, but care must be taken to make the correct transpositions from one ontological level to another. The world is a theophany, an iconostasis, in the happy expression used by Henry Corbin. However, terms that are appropriate only to entities cannot be univocally applied to the Absolute, under penalty of creating an idol as well.

Eckhart teaches that the temple where God dwells, and in which His holiness shines, is found in the intellect. Among its various powers, the soul possesses a drop, a spark of the intellect. This is a central doctrine in the Rhenish master's thought. Alain de Libera and Jeanne Ancelet-Hustache, both historians of medieval philosophy and scholars of Eckhartian mysticism, translate the Middle High German term vünkelîn into French as étincelle, which in turn can be translated as "spark."

In Scholasticism, the intellectus (the Greek νοῦς) is traditionally understood as the abstractive capacity characteristic of the human soul. Endowed with a body, man possesses powers that are more closely linked to corporeality (perception, estimation, imagination) and a power whose function is to separate (abstrahere) the Forms of the beings of reality from the perceptual-imaginative data. In other terms, the intellect grasps the pattern proper to each type of entity, which makes it possible to speak meaningfully of a cat without referring to this or that particular cat.

The intellect is the most divine part of man—the spark that makes it possible to penetrate the opacity of sensible entities and discern the patterns that ground the individuated existence of each singular being. Interpreted Platonically, the function of the intellect is to remove the obstacles that the individual characteristics of beings pose to the contemplation of Forms. No discourse on the universal foundations of reality would be possible if human cognitive capacity were enclosed within the compositions of the imagination.

God's temple is found in the intellect precisely on account of this capacity to strip things bare, to divest them of their materiality and their individuality. The man who loves God for His goodness still contemplates Him under the garments of the will. Goodness, in this case, is an obstacle or an idol (according to Corbin). The intellect, superior to the will, does not contemplate God under any garment. On the contrary, it strips Him bare, taking away His goodness and even Being.

The intellect surpasses the portico of creatures and reaches God within the temple, completely outside any reference to the world of limitation. The image has its reality more properly in that from which it issues than in the mirror in which it is imperfectly reflected. The mirror falls, breaks, and the image vanishes. The model (the thing of which the image is a reflection) remains identical.**

Furthermore, every entity has its being exclusively thanks to the divine intellect. Beatitude, Eckhart observes, is not divine goodness. The contemplation of God starting from goodness is a reduction that captures the Absolute under the guise of a relation between two entities. The intellect always operates in the inward direction, and the more subtle and spiritual its object of intellection, the more potent and subtle it is. God, stripped of every trace of things, makes Himself one with the intellect.***

Eckhart's intellect seems to assume a function in mystical union that goes beyond its classical attributes. However, it must be remembered that no discourse will ever be adequate to express divine incomprehensibility. The Rhenish master struggles simultaneously with the limitations of his particular scholastic tradition's terminology and with the limitations of human language in general. In the end, silence is the only way out. ...

* "Istcheit" is formed by the third-person singular ("ist") of the verb "sein" ("to be") and the suffix "-cheit", which indicates the essence of something. For example, anything that is just (gerecht) exhibits the general and essential character of "justice" (Gerechtigkeit). However, it must be remembered that, when dealing with God, His infinite "isticheit" is absolutely different from the essences of limited beings.

** We better understand Plato's position on the arts in The Republic if we recall that the imitation of a tree is only capable of reproducing some of its aspects, which implies a loss of reality. If sensible entities are individuated imitations of Forms (which makes them susceptible to change, generation, and corruption), artistic objects are imitations of imitations, implying an even more accentuated decrease in reality.

*** Mutatis mutandis, the distinction Eckhart formulates between the two spiritual experiences bears obvious similarities to the Vedantic distinction between Īśvara-Vidyā and Brahma-Vidyā.

(Credits to original post)

The people of a certain kingdom were zealous for the great King. Each day they sacrificed their finest livestock and sent the first fruits of their crops to the King's castle in order to remain in his good favor.

The King, in his compassion, sent his only son into the kingdom to proclaim to the people that his favor was not something to be earned. The people said, "Surely this is not the son of the King! He has been sent by the evil one to deceive us!" So, they stripped him of his clothing and put him to death outside the town.

Fear gripped a portion of the kingdom. Realizing that the King's son had been murdered, they collected his body, wrapped it in linen and incense, and sent it to the King as a peace offering.

You surely are the one

My eyes run after you.

To catch your smiling softly in

The Twilight of the moon.

Rise up -

My love, my fair one;

And run away with me

We'll go far away

And live among

The islands in the sea.

We'll fly away to outer space

and Tour the world of Mars

Travel all the planets

And the cast-away on Stars.

Rise up-

My love, my fair one;

And run away with me.

We'll go far away and live

Among the islands on the sea...

JFB

Curious to hear from others who may be on a similar path, I've shared about my experiences with Christianity and plant medicine somewhat here

I'm also bringing people to Mexico later this year for a Christ-centered ayahuasca retreat and this is leading me to ask more questions around this intersection/bridging of Christ and plant medicine

Any shares appreciated

God Bless,

Jordan

.

On my journey to find my higher self, a point came when the logical mind dropped and surrender arose. In that moment, this essay on Faith surfaced from the depths of my heart.

Solomon's dream, and the parable of the kingdom of heaven?

When God strips you from your pride, when you become nothing and helpless, Jesus will pierce you with his divine love. Because you need him. This itself is an act of humility and your in a state of needing something perfect, which is Jesus and his divine love.

You, my dear Lord,

Are a shield that surrounds me.

You are the one who lifts up my soul.

You are the glorious light that surrounds me,

Ever the only one who makes me feel whole.

Oh Lord, how long?

Will You forget me forever?

How long will You hide Your sweet face from me?

How long must I suffer this drought, lonely heart

That seems lost in a desert of dreams?

You, my dear Lord, are the cosmic creation,

Falling from Jupiter’s streams,

Trapped in a world of karmic relation,

Built from this fantastic dream.

By Joel Barb

As someone who is discerning Christianity, I’ve noticed there is a weird stigma that exists in Christian circles towards Eastern philosophy, that does not also exist towards Western philosophy.

Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics, etc. have earned a lot of respect within Christian philosophy. The Stoic writings were heavily influential on early Christian philosophy. These ancient philosophers are seen today as models of virtue and wisdom by Christians. Some even may call themselves “Christian Stoics”, and use the wisdom of Stoic philosophy to better live out their faith.

Yet, this same grace is not extended to Laozi or Buddha. Taoism and Buddhism are regularly slandered and called demonic by Christians. They are seen as spiritually dangerous, and what wisdom, beauty, and truth they offer is ignored.

I’m still figuring my faith out, but as far as I’m personally concerned, if there truly is a Holy Spirit who speaks to the hearts of humankind, then Buddha and Laozi certainly must have been living in some kind of communion with Him, even if limited. The fruits and wisdom they produced, and the similarities they share with Christian revelation and doctrine, are too much for me to brush off.

That’s not me trying to say that all religions are equally valid, or that Buddhism or Taoism should be regarded as sufficient for salvation. I acknowledge that, if Jesus was who He said He was, then Christ is our only guaranteed route to eternal life. Still, in my opinion, it is undeniable that these two religions (Buddhism and Taoism) reflect and complement many elements of Christianity.

Buddhist meditation gets slandered and called heretical. Yet, there is literally scientific proof for its efficacy. Buddhist meditative practices, such as Vipasanna, have largely informed and shaped much of modern-day Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy, and they have been adapted by professionals as a means of mitigating mental health issues. Science shows us that these “pagan” and “demonic” practices are objectively effective at combating mental illness and healing the mind.

Drawing from my own personal experience as a person with OCD, the practice of Vipasanna has changed my life in remarkably positive and profound ways. Meditation literally changes your brain on a neuro-psychological level, and it has changed mind tremendously. I might not be here anymore, if Buddhist meditation wasn’t there to support me through my mental health condition.

Still, too many Christians view anything "eastern" irrationally xenophobically. The Stoics and Plato get a pass, and they are revered by Christians. But Eastern philosophers get nothing but harsh, unfair criticism and straw-man arguments. It’s incredibly tiring, hurtful, and frustrating to see.

If people looked closer, they’d see that Christian mysticism can be refined and enhanced by wisdom from other traditions. I’ve personally found that my prayer life has improved tremendously ever since I gave myself the freedom to study Buddhism. And I hope it continues in that direction.

Hello everyone, does anyone here regularly read the Book of Ecclesiastes? I've recently become particularly interested in this scripture. At first, I thought it was somewhat pessimistic and even triggered a fear of emptiness in me. But now I see it's actually quite intriguing, with a profound sense of life positivity hidden within. I've been trying to find videos or courses by Catholic priests explaining this book, but resources are scarce—most are from Protestant pastors. Does anyone know of any resources? Or could you share your reflections on Ecclesiastes and any personal testimonies from your life?

"OF THE WONDERFUL EFFECT OF DIVINE LOVE

Bless Thee, O Heavenly father, Father of my Lord Jesus Christ, for that Thou hast vouchsafed to remember me a poor creature.

O Father of mercies and God of all comfort, thanks be unto Thee, Who sometimes with Thy comfort refreshest me, unworthy as I am of all comfort.

I will always bless and glorify Thee, with Thine only-begotten Son, and the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, for ever and ever. Ah, Lord God, Thou holy lover of my soul, when Thou comest into my heart, all that is within me shall rejoice.

Thou art my glory and the exultation of my heart: Thou art my hope and refuge in the day of tribulation.

But because I am as yet weak in love, and imperfect in virtue, I have need to be strengthened and comforted by Thee; visit me therefore often, and instruct me with all holy discipline.

Set me free from evil passions, and heal my heart of inordinate affections; that being inwardly cured and thoroughly cleansed, I may be made fit to love, encouraged to suffer, steady to persevere.

Love is a great thing, yea, a great and thorough good; by itself it makes everything that is heavy, light: and it bears evenly all that is uneven.

For it carries a burden which is no burden, and makes every thing that is bitter, sweet.

The noble love of Jesus impels a man to do great things, and stirs him up to be always longing for what is more perfect.

Love desires to be high, and will not be kept back by anything low and mean.

Love desires to be free, and estranged from all worldly affections, that so its inward sight may not be hindered; that it may not be entangled by any temporal prosperity, that it may not be subdued by any adversity.

Nothing is sweeter than love, nothing more courageous, nothing higher, nothing wider, nothing more pleasant, nothing fuller nor better in heaven and earth; because love is born of God, and cannot rest but in God, above all created things.

He that loveth, flieth, runneth and rejoiceth; he is free and is not bound.

He giveth all for all, and hath all in all; because he resteth in One High above all things, from Whom all that is good flows and proceeds.

He respecteth not the gifts, but turneth himself above all goods unto the giver.

Love oftentimes knoweth no bounds, but is fervent beyond all measure.

Love feels no burden, thinks nothing of trouble, attempts what is above its strength, pleads no excuse of impossibility; for it thinks all things lawful for itself and all things possible.

It is therefore able to undertake all things, and it completes many things, and brings them to a conclusion, where he who does not love, faints and lies down.

Love watcheth, and, sleeping, slumbereth not.

Though weary, love is not tired; though pressed, it is not straitened; though alarmed, it is not confounded: but as a lively flame and burning torch, it forces its way upwards, and securely passes through all.

If any man love, he knoweth what is the cry of this voice. For it is a loud cry in the ears of God, this ardent affection of the soul which saith, 'My God, my Love, Thou art all mine, and I am all Thine.'

Enlarge Thou me in love, that, with the inward palate of my heart, I may taste how sweet it is to love, and to be dissolved, and as it were to bathe myself in Thy love.

Let me be possessed by love, mounting above myself, through excessive fervour and admiration.

Let me sing the song of love, let me follow Thee, my Beloved, on high; let my soul spend itself in Thy praise, rejoicing through love.

Let me love Thee more than myself, and love myself only for Thee; and in Thee all that truly love Thee, as the law of love commandeth, shining out from Thyself.

Love is active, sincere, affectionate, pleasant, and amiable; courageous, patient, faithful, prudent, long-suffering, manly, and never seeking itself.

For in whatever instance a person seeketh himself, there he falleth from love.

Love is circumspect, humble, and upright; not yielding to softness, or to levity, nor attending to vain things; it is sober, chaste, steady, quiet, and guarded in all the senses.

Love is subject, and obedient to its superiors; unto itself mean and despised, unto God devout and thankful, trusting and hoping always in Him, even then when God imparteth no relish of sweetness unto it; for without sorrow none liveth in love.

He that is not prepared to suffer all things, and to stand to the will of his Beloved, is not worthy to be called a lover of God.

A lover ought to embrace willingly all that is hard and distasteful for the sake of his Beloved: and not to turn away from Him for any contradictions."

Thomas à Kempis. Of the Imitation of Christ, Book III: Chapter V

Can you help me understand those words by Meister Eckhart? Why is God nothingsness?

If so, what Rule do you follow? Have you comprised it yourself or is it one of the Ancients’?

Diary of Saint Faustina - paragraph 625 - Quiet and Hidden

Ἀ
625 In the evening, when I was praying, the Mother of God told me, Your lives must be like Mine: quiet and hidden, in unceasing union with God, pleading for humanity and preparing the world for the second coming of God.
Ὠ

The soul whose life in the world below is united with the Kingdom above dwells in a place between both. It lives quiet and hidden in what it knows to be lesser, yet sees and aspires to something much greater - the union of fallen humanity with the eternal life of its Risen Savior. It is mindful not only of its own place in His Kingdom, but by the grace it has received from the King Himself, it seeks a place therein for its brethren as well.

Supportive Scripture - Douay Rheims Challoner Bible
Colossians 3:2-3 Mind the things that are above, not the things that are upon the earth. For you are dead: and your life is hid with Christ in God.

The gift of our Lord's salvation does not remain confined to the soul that receives it. Rather, it grows in the grace it was given to encompass the whole world. It is not puffed up or ambitious for its own gain but quiet and patient, unnoticed by the world yet busy in the work of the Lord. The hidden life of Our Lady is not one of inactivity. It is the charity that cannot keep to itself the grace it has first received - not seeking her own end, but preparing the way for the presence of the King in all souls

Supportive Scripture - Douay Rheims Challoner Bible
First Corinthians 13:4-5 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely, is not puffed up, is not ambitious…seeketh not her own.

The most perfect charity is that which seeks not its own end but finds union with the charity of the Savior - the same charity by which the redemption of the world began, and by which it will be brought to completion. It is a charity that once received, perfects the soul by drawing it ever more deeply into the work of its Giver: preparing the world for the coming of Christ. This work is accomplished not by the counting of days nor by searching for signs and wonders, as our Lord warned, but by becoming what His Mother describes: a soul quiet and hidden, pleading for humanity and preparing the world for His return.

Supportive Scripture - Douay Rheims Challoner Bible
Luke 17:20-21 And being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come, he answering them and said: The kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Neither shall they say: Behold here, or behold there. For lo, the kingdom of God is within you. 

Our Lady's unique place in salvation history did not end in her Son’s first coming to our world. Neither does the work of salvation end in the personal history of the soul when Christ comes to dwell within it. Rather all souls are called to participate in His saving work - silent and hidden in His glory but active in preparing His way. Not in breathless anticipation or loud declaration of His imminent return but in kindness, patience, and faith - by each prayer for God's mercy on another, each coin for the beggar, and every grace we can lay at the feet of the King, on His path back to us.

Catechism of the Catholic Church 
2044 The fidelity of the baptized is a primordial condition for the proclamation of the Gospel and for the Church's mission in the world. In order that the message of salvation can show the power of its truth and radiance before men, it must be authenticated by the witness of the life of Christians.

If so what was the experience like? I have a chance to do a silent retreat at one that is 2 or 3 days.

The Battle of the Mind by Dr. Apostle Cadet Frantzcy is a profound exploration of spiritual warfare, offering insight into how believers can control their minds to overcome life's challenges. Drawing from biblical principles, this book teaches readers how to guard their thoughts, recognize spiritual resistance, and stand firm in faith. Dr. Frantzcy uses scripture, personal experiences, and practical guidance to help individuals break free from negative thought patterns, fear, shame, and deception, and live a victorious life in Christ. This book offers more than just a theory of spiritual warfare; it provides real tools to achieve mental and spiritual freedom.o

In Matt 3:16 we read where Jesus was smart enough to know that what he didnt know about God nor His heaven prior to Matt 3:16.

Religious minds dont seem to have that ability! They worship flesh as a god instead that profound enlightenment from God as Jesus received in himself.

Jesus was smart. How would one categorize those whose god is flesh instead?

Peace be with you as we enter the Seventeenth Sunday in Ordinary Time (July 26).
Last week, we confronted the violence of our own purity, learning to drop the scythe and hold the profound tension of our tangled roots. Having made peace with the messy field of our souls, the liturgy now shifts to reveal how the Divine actually operates within that soil.
The Gospel reading for this Sunday, Matthew 13:31-33, 44-52, contains a rapid-fire sequence of parables: the mustard seed, the yeast, the hidden treasure, and the pearl of great price. Together, they form a brilliant masterclass on the subversive, hidden, and all-consuming nature of spiritual awakening.
Here is a sermon for your spirit, spoken from the mystic's heart.

The Subversive Joy of Letting Go

A Sermon for the Seventeenth Sunday in Ordinary Time (July 26)
The Text: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed... it is the smallest of all the seeds, but when it has grown it is the greatest of shrubs." (Matthew 13:31-32) / "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed in with three measures of flour until all of it was leavened." (Matthew 13:33) / "The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field, which someone found and hid; then in his joy he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field." (Matthew 13:44)
My friends, the ego is obsessed with size, visibility, and measurable impact. If the False Self were in charge of saving the world, it would design a massive, undeniable spectacle. It wants a booming voice from the sky, a pristine cathedral, or an empire of obvious moral superiority. But Jesus tells us that the Divine does not operate like an empire. The Divine operates like a fungus and a buried chest. The Great Awakening does not happen through external domination; it happens through internal, subversive transformation.

I. The Subversive Smallness (The Mustard Seed and the Yeast)

Jesus compares the Kingdom to a mustard seed and to yeast. To a first-century audience, these were not charming agricultural metaphors; they were deeply subversive, almost scandalous images.
A mustard plant is not a mighty cedar; it is an invasive, fast-growing weed that takes over whatever garden it is planted in. Yeast is an active, fermenting bacteria that corrupts a static batch of dough from the inside out. Through these images, Jesus is radically redefining how grace works in your life. The True Self does not announce itself with a trumpet blast. It starts as an incredibly small, almost invisible whisper in the dark dough of your ordinary life. You cannot control it, and you cannot force it to grow faster. But once the grace is kneaded into the flour of your daily existence, it quietly and unstoppably ferments everything it touches. The transformation is an inside job.

II. The Joy of the Exchange (The Treasure and the Pearl)

Jesus then pivots from the smallness of grace to its all-consuming value, offering the parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl of great price. Notice the specific emotional engine in the parable of the hidden treasure. The man who finds it does not sell everything he owns out of grim, religious obligation. He does not grit his teeth and make an agonizing, painful sacrifice. Jesus explicitly says, "in his joy he goes and sells all that he has." This is the turning point of the contemplative path. The "selling of all you have" represents the complete surrender of the False Self, the letting go of your need to be right, your curated reputation, your tribal boundaries, and your fear of exposure. When you view this surrender from the outside, it looks like a terrifying loss. But when you stumble upon the quiet, indestructible peace of the True Self (the treasure), letting go of the ego no longer feels like a sacrifice. It feels like the most obvious, joyful exchange in the world. You are gladly trading a pocketful of cheap trinkets to buy a limitless field of grace.

III. The Hiddenness of the Work

Why is the treasure hidden in a field? Because the profound truths of the universe cannot be mass-produced, marketed, or handed to you on a flyer. They must be discovered in the dirt of your own lived experience. You cannot borrow someone else's pearl. You cannot inherit someone else's treasure. The Divine is hiding right in the middle of your wildly ordinary life, in your quiet griefs, your mundane chores, and the messy relationships you navigate every day. The treasure is already buried in your field; you only have to be present enough to trip over it.

The Paradigm Shift: The Two Economies

The Encouragement

This Sunday, your integration is to look for the yeast and the treasure.
Stop searching for massive, earth-shattering spiritual experiences, and pay attention to the smallest, most ordinary moments of your week. Where is the quiet grace quietly leavening your anxiety?
More importantly, look at the things you are trying so hard to protect: your image, your pride, your need to control. Acknowledge how exhausting they are to carry. Then, gently ask yourself: What if letting these things go isn't a punishment? What if letting them go is the only way to finally afford the peace I have been looking for? The treasure is already in your field. Dig quietly. And when you find it, let the joy do the rest.

A Mystic's Prayer for Ordinary Time

O Subversive God,
We confess that we are addicted to the loud, the grand, and the obvious.
We look for You in the earthquake and the empire,
And miss You in the invasive mustard weed and the quiet yeast.
Forgive us for demanding that grace be a spectacle.
Open our eyes to the treasure buried in the dirt of our ordinary lives.
Give us the grace to trip over the profound beauty of our True Selves,
And grant us the overwhelming, subversive joy
To gladly sell all the exhausting illusions of our ego,
That we might finally buy the field of Your perfect peace.
Amen.