I’d like to say a few words about the nature of the Divine Mother (1) and contrast “Her” (she is not a “she”; Father and Mother God do not have gender) with some of the figures often represented as being “gods” in various religions.
I’d like to do that because I hope to have her on An Hour with an Angel again in perhaps two weeks time (if my colleagues agree) and I’d like people to know ahead of time who it is we’re listening to.
Again I don’t say this as someone pretending to be a spiritual teacher. I’m not a spiritual teacher. I have no right to consider myself one. I’m simply a person who very much enjoys studying these matters and has opinions on them.
The entities called the Holy Father and the Divine Mother are the same one God playing different roles and featuring different aspects of the One. When God abides in “his” (he is not a “he”) native Being, he is transcendental, formless, still and silent. Having created the world of form, when he enters the world of form and engages in creation, preservation and transformation, he is phenomenal, form-ful, active and sonic.
The word “phenomenon” is a synonym for “thing” and so the world of things is called the phenomenal world and the Mother is also called the “Phenomenal” versus the Father as the “Transcendental.” He transcends the phenomenal world or world of things. He is not objective and no objects exist within his native Being; he is the one subject, the only subject, the one actor who plays all parts in the temporary dreamworld in which life exists.
The ancients made the distinction of naming God in form the Mother. Lao Tzu affords an example:
Nameless indeed is the source of creation But things have a mother and she has a name. (2)
The source of creation is God in its aspect of the Father; the actual creator – Procreatrix – is God in its aspect of the Mother. This device was used simply to provide a way of speaking about God and its creation of the world and life.
We’ve discussed many times that God created the world so that forms could be created who would set about the task of realizing their true identity. Whenever a life form realizes who it is – at essence, in its original nature, in a moment of enlightenment – God meets God. And for that meeting was all of life created.
Everything within the created world was created by the Mother and that includes angels and archangels, gods and fairies, elementals and elohim, all universes, all dimensions, everything that can be considered a thing.
Everything within the created world is “material,” from the Third Dimension to the Kingdom of the Seraphim. It’s simply that matter (mater, Mother) is more and more refined. The only thing not material is the Father, which is not a thing at all.
So when the Mother appears to us on InLight Radio, we’re not simply hearing from one god among many gods. Many people think of Krishna as a god, or Rama, or Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. Many may also think of them in ways different to being “gods,” such as as avatars or Brahman incarnate, etc. Some go further and think of the Mother as one more god among gods.
When the Mother speaks to us on InLight radio, they might think of her as one more personality beside Sanat Kumara or even Archangel Michael, whom I serve (as well as the Mother).
But she is not. She is the source of all form. The only thing she is not the source of in the world of form is the Light that we call the soul, the Christ, the Atman, the Self. That’s a direct fragment of the Father, which the Mother houses in a “temple of seven pillars,” a body with seven chakras. And the only thing she’s not the source of more generally is the Light we call the Father, in the transcendental realm.
Why I’m saying this is to set up our listening when the Mother does appear before us. That’s a very sacred event, not at all to be taken lightly. Linda before she channels the Mother must rest and meditate for hours. I, when I interview the Mother, am often blissed out for hours afterwards. We’re not talking to a lesser god, if you will. We’re talking to the Prime Force in the universe.
Her form is consciousness itself but she manifests often as the universal creative vibration known as Aum/Amen, the primal energy called by Hindus Shakti, the spirit that moves upon the waters called by Christians the Holy Spirit She can be heard as a ringing in the ears. She calls all matter into being, holds it in place for a while, and then returns it to nothingness in time.
Nothing in her domain is permanent save the Light that is the Christ or Atman. Her role is to educate the Child of God or Self and raise it to knowledge of the Father, the Supreme Self. So that’s what I wanted to say to allow us, if you will, to appreciate who it is we’re listening to when the Divine Mother graces us with her presence.
Footnotes
(1) For more on the Divine Mother, see:
- On the Nature of the Divine Mother or Holy Spirit
- The Divine Mother: Come to Me as I Come to You – Part 1/2
- The Divine Mother: Come to Me as I Come to You – Part 2/2
- The Law-Giving Mother and Her Lawful Universe
- The Natural Law was Created by the Father through the Mother
- In the Beginning Was the Word
- Is the “Holy Spirit” Feminine?
- The Father and the Father … by the Mother
- The Divine Mother is All We Can Know
- Transcript of the Divine Mother on An Hour with an Angel, May 7, 2012
(2) Lao Tzu, The Way of Life. The Tao Te Ching. trans. R.B. Blakney. New York, etc.: Avon, 1975, 53.
Source: http://the2012scenario.com/2012/11/the-divine-mother-is-not-a-god-among-gods/
Openhearted Rebellion 
Steve,
You have explained what I mean when I say “God”. I’ve never been able to word it so clearly. Thx.
Recently, a man asked me if we could converse about religion/spirituality. I hold no truck with religion. He does. I consented. Since he asked me while I was at work, my first answer was, “Not here.” I suggested that he write questions. I’d take those home. I’d reply in writing. Suggestion accepted, I found myself composing a manuscript in order to answer six questions. One of them was, “What is the meaning of the cross?” as you know, that subject could be addressed adequately in a large book! Later we met to continue the conversation face to face.
I should mention that the man thinks that Jesus had to die to save him from eternal damnation and the Bible is God’s rule-book. This makes a conversation between us rather strange, having so many points on which we must agree to disagree. Happily, he has a sense of humor. He’d like to see me “accept Jesus” in his sense…he prays for me… yet here I am, all full of my Self! As to “converting” me, I told him, “Many have tried…many have died” (a line from DUNE); and he laughted. Good, because I couldn’t resist.
I don’t reciprocate by worrying about him. He’ll get it, in his own time.
I’d told him that my spiritual stance is not based on argument, but on direct perception or experience. I do expect my mind to comprehend and formulate my experience into an understanding that I can speak of, but only to an extent. I told him this: My ultimate belief is that only one thing exists: God. In practice, that translates into a belief in the absolute spiritual sovereignty of every individual. God became many for the sake of beauty, love, pleasure, joy…and even to experience being challenged by apparent terrors, lies, and affronts to beauty and love. How can one demonstrate for the soul that love is eternal, except by first forgetting and denying it? Truth and life are known in contradistinction to lies and half-truths, half-living. Sovereign individuality and wisdom are our goals, as is fun. Yes. Fun.
It’s rather different from a rule-making God who wants unworthy underlings to obey and grovel on their knees, having created a playing field in which we must sin and be saved from ourselves.
Yet, the man still speaks to me.
Interesting, the conversation, but perhaps ultimately a distraction. So, I began to wonder about the purpose of this encounter. If I am to get across a new idea of Spirit, how?
I intend to print your essay above, give the copy to this man. I intend to tell him, “This is the best summary I can offer of what I believe about God, even though it was written by someone else.”
I sincerely hope that is OK by you, ’cause I’m doing it. : ) Complete with footnotes and image (beautiful).
I’ve never listened to your broadcasts. I’m on dial-up. After this, I intend to look for your transcripts/archives. Whether or not your essay does impress my friend (my feeling is that he will initially meet it with an emotionally based reaction: “The Bible is God’s Word,” unaware that emotions are physical and not the senses of spiritual perception….I can tell his clinging to the belief system derives from physical emotion by the very quality of clinging.) I find your essay a clear statement of the God/creation principles, the beginning. Then you state the ultimate goal: knowledge of Self. So, from first to last. Thank You.
You say you are not a spiritual teacher, but that is for others to decide. Your explanations may ignite insights in another. I think you are a very good teacher. But I also know what you mean, and thank you once again, this time for not wanting to be a guru.
LikeLike