willbulow's picture

"That a man shall not take ensample at the bodily ascension of Christ, for to strain his imagination upwards bodily in the time of prayer: and that time, place, and body, these three should be forgotten in all ghostly working."

This is the third chapter whose "title" warns us not to think in terms of physical direction in the performance of this work. As in the previous chapters, so here, we can find other things that could as well be taken as the topic. One I find in this case is, he mentions that there is more like a change than a local movement in this work. There seems to be a certain change of consciousness that's almost automatic, almost by definition the result of forgetting time, place, and body. Maybe here again, though, we should guard against thinking that this is the purpose. There should be no other purpose than drawing closer to God as we work in this exercise.

willbulow's picture

Still wondering about in or out.

Thank you, pandacca. I love responses like this that I can read and meditate on several times and get new insights each time.

I was wondering, and still am, whether there is a difference in experience for people who follow one or the other of these traditional "paths." This isn't so much a question about absolute reality as it is about approaches to, and experiences in, meditation. I had assumed that one approaches God one of these two ways, but this recent discussion has showed me that this isn't necessarily the case, so my question loses some of the importance I had assumed it had. If I'm the only one interested, maybe there's no point in my seeking further on this. Pandacca's answer makes my question irrelevent, and it's so Dionysian, which appeals to me, and I especially like the way he ends, making love a condition for our return to God.

Bill B.