MYRTLE & KING TUT
"Your Honor, I promise that King Tut will directly tie into Myrtle Fillmore's views on regeneration and reincarnation, as well as my client's views and future directions for the Unity movement."
The Judge responds: "I will allow this line questioning for now, but be careful counselor."
"Thank you your Honor."
_____
My number on the Dr. Tom Index is a 2.
First, this week is Myrtle's birthday. Happy Birthday Myrtle!
Second, since we just moved to Lee's Summit, we have been trying to learn more-- and experience-- the Greater Kansas City community. And we have have been having a great time.
Yesterday we went to Kansas City's Union Station to see the exhibition on Tutankhamen. It was fantastic. First, the period of the 1880s to 1920s and Egypt is shown, and it was from this that Howard Carter dreamed that he would find the tomb of the great King Tut. Then you are led into the Egypt of this period and into Carter's fantastic discover of the tomb of Tutankhamen. You are shown chambers that look exactly like what Carter saw. But then in other halls the objects are "unpacked" and you can see them individually and up close. You can read about them and listen to short lectures on various things related to the burial of an Egyptian King. You are taken through the Egyptian Book of the Dead and the key gods and symbols.
I was amazed. I can't tell you how many times the words "resurrection", "regeneration", and "reincarnation" were used. No, this was not modern scholars placing modern usage on ancient Egyptians. This was example after example of ancient Egypt dealing with the same Jungian archetypes that are in our heads today.
For the moment, put aside resurrection, regeneration, and reincarnation. There was King Tut slaying the monster. It looked in so many ways like St. George slaying the dragon. You don't buy that one, then how about the goddess Isis holding here baby Horus-- It was so much like Mary holding Jesus that you have seen a million times!
It then struck me how I view Myrtle and Charles' views on regeneration, resurrection, and reincarnation. Myrtle and Charles are dealing with very important archetypes-- just as Jung did (and I mean this as a great compliment to Myrtle and Charles!) Jung was very interested in alchemy, but not because he wanted to turn base metals into gold. He saw in alchemy very strong metaphysical truths. We are like base metals but we also contain an inner gold. This Philosopher's Stone can change base metals into a "shining city on a hill." Alchemy was a powerful representation of individualization, Jung explained.
In the same way both the Egyptian Book of the Dead (and Tutankhamen's tomb) and Myrtle and Charles were dealing with very powerful archetypes including: eternal life, zeal, being young in spirit, etc. One of the recorded lectures at the Union Station exhibit talked about how the Egyptians believed that "ba" (i.e., the spiritual life force) has to be recombined with the physical corpse for the King to have eternal life. I see "regeneration" as trying to infuse the material body with "ba." Myrtle was expressing her dreams, images, and faith about several key archetypes that have been active in the human psyche going back to ancient Egypt-- and beyond!
It was interesting, at times the "lectures" on ancient Egypt even talked about a "material realm" and a "spiritual realm." It almost sounded like Heart-Based Metaphysics (and the relative realm and the absolute realm).
Does this mean that what Myrtle was talking about has no actual physical reality. I for one do believe that there is a physical reality to what Myrtle and Charles were saying. Look at Charles: "I sizzle with zeal"--- and he said that in his 90s. Myrtle and Charles were young in heart and active. Or as my former home church minister- Rev. Donna Johnson-- once said, "Could you imagine Charles if he were alive now? He would have been all over the internet!"
My wife-- Debbie-- worked several years in a health clinic. She said to me, "The people who retain a positive attitude show a much higher probability of recovery than the folks in negative thinking."
I think St. Paul had it right: "Now we see through a glass darkly." I love Physics-- and science in general. Currently we believe that over 96 % of the universe is made up of dark matter and dark energy. Only about 4 % is made up of elements-- like gold, helium, carbon, etc.-- that we know on earth. The problem is that we know next to nothing about dark energy and dark matter. If Physics knows so little about 96 % of the universe-- or even if this is the only physical universe-- we should not feel bad that we know so little about regeneration, reincarnation, and resurrection.
One of the best comments I have ever hear about this came from my spiritual mentor Rev EJ Niles (who was the minister of my home church before she came to Unity Institute). She said that the final chapter on all of this has yet to be written-- or understood-- by us. "Charles and Myrtle could prove to be way ahead of their times in their thinking," she added.
That is what I love about Unity-- that it is open to new ideas and not frozen in times. All I know is that I want to be in my 90s and say, "I sizzle with zeal." I would like to know when it is time to make my transition-- like Myrtle-- and go in peace and faith that "I can do more from the other side." So even if we do not hit the mark of perfect regeneration, I want that imperfect regeneration that will give me "life and life abundantly." Don't you?
I think it is foolish to believe that for all times only Jesus will reach the mark of resurrection and regeneration. Like Al Jolson, I believe, "You aint seen nothing yet."
Rick,
ReplyDeleteSitting in a rest area in Sheridan WY because they have wifi. I think this may be another one of those questions that we are all going to have different perspectives on. I would never in a million years have combined King Tut with the Fillmore's beliefs on regeneration. You made it work, and things sound similarly the way its presented. I believe regeneration is possible via our thoughts and attitudes however I'm not on board with regeneration in the physical form.
"I'm not on board with regeneration in the physical form."
DeleteQ: Was any other option considered by Mrs. Fillmore? If not, how do you reconcile your position and hers?
Regeneration of our thoughts and coming to a new understanding of consciousness seems to be where Mrs. Fillmore was going. I can't deny the obvious though where Mrs. Fillmore truly believed she would be able to transcend death. Scientifically I'm told it is possible however it hasn't yet been proven. I believe Doug summed thing's up well for me in his post about quantum verses the Newtonian point of view. If someone were to bring up Mrs. Fillmore's belief in transcending death I may cringe while attempting to get my thoughts together on the subject. I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds this a bit unsettling.
DeleteRick - With the comment you left on my post for this week, I anticipated an entirely different post from you. :)
ReplyDeleteThe main difference I see is how we rated how our "views of Myrtle's theology had been affected by last week's study of her views on regeneration." I rated my view of Myrtle's theology being affected greatly = 8.5, You rated your view of Myrtle's theology being affected in a minor way = 2. To me, that simply indicates you were already well informed about Myrtle's belief in regeneration, so nothing much changed. I, on the other hand, was not well informed about regeneration or how passionately Myrtle believed in that concept, so my views of her theology were greatly changed. It doesn't mean I agree with her theology, only that my views of her theology were influenced.
I hope you weren't gearing up for a debate! Nice post - and I'm glad you're enjoying Kansas City.
Thanks Daybree, I guess I would compare Myrtle's views on this stuff to the recent changes that have taken place in thinking about Baseball. When I was a kid people looked at batting averages (hits per time up to bat). But now people tend to look at: The percent of times you got to at least first base given the times you were up to bat.
ReplyDeleteIn the old days people were only looking at hits. But now the thinking is: Who cares how you got to at least first base? The name of the game is to get on base-- and that can happen through a hit, a walk, the pitcher hitting you with the ball, etc. For example, if you are walked it means that either the pitcher was not having a good day or the pitcher felt you were so good he didn't dare through you a strike.
Myrtle is the same way: The goal is to "get on base" (i.e., spiritual growth and a stronger unity with the Christ within). That is the goal and it can happen many different ways-- through regeneration, through reincarnation (and not just on Earth), ressurection, or ways we don't know about yet.
I have such respect for Derick Jetter. He always wants to get a hit. But if the pitcher walks him, he's glad to be on base. Myrtle was the same way, I think.
Also, after being so wrong in my 20s about God/Spirit I am not willing to rule out the possibility of physical regeneration (and I would be glad to get a base on balls via a partial physical regeneration-- and I think I am getting it. I do think our faith and attitude can directly impact our physical conditions.)
Blessings,
RIck
Rick, as someone who also enjoys physics, I'd like to build on what you said about what science knows (or more correctly, what it doesn't know) about the universe. You pointed out only that merely 4% of the universe is understood. Only 0.0000009% (I'm not certain how many zeros are supposed to be there but you get the picture) of that is what's called matter. Matter-wise, the rest is empty. And, that miniscule amount of materiality (electrons and quarks) isn't really there until after an observation is made (if we accept the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics as the majority of physicists to). So, we might conclude that the presence of the entire physical universe requires it first be observed. So, how physical is it, really? You asked, "Does this mean that what Myrtle was talking about has no actual physical reality." I think that is what she was saying. I'd say she was definitely ahead of her time. -Doug
ReplyDeleteGreat post Rick. I absolutely agree with you. I want to sizzle with zeal when I am in my 90s and beyond! While I have not been able to embrace the concept of regeneration I say "great" to those who have. Reincarnation still holds for me and when I make my transition I want to do so in peace knowing that I lived my Truth. Myrtle certainly did.
ReplyDeleteRick-
ReplyDeleteI so love your enthusiasm and explanatory metaphors. From King Tut in a courtroom scene to getting on base with Derek Jeter, this has been a fun morning already! Is anyone here really talking about regeneration in the physical, as in coming back to life after death? I, too, would find that creepy… altho it does remind me (spoiler alert) of bringing Chris Pine’s Capt. Kirk back to life by transfusing him with Khan’s super-human blood. A welcome plot device, if fairly absurd. But I digress. My conceptualization of regeneration includes the physical as in physical healing initiated and maintained by spiritual energy, with the two working together in life. It’s how I account for healing. Is not “healing” the same as what we call “regeneration,” with spirit being at the very core this possibility as Source? Please, if I’m using the term ‘regeneration’ improperly (and you think I’m WRONG), do not hesitate to point out my error before I go on to say more about it in my blog for this assignment. I sometimes read the other blogs first to get an idea of the chatter before running in some crazy off topic direction of my own. But, heck, maybe I should give myself permission to be a little crazy. It might produce more creative and fun results… like Rick’s!
Blue skies,
Lesley