Font Size

From THE SHROUD we know Jesus stood 5 foot, eleven inches, was built like a lumberjack and was as strong as an ox. We also know he was dirt poor. Being a Galilean peasant he dropped his aitches when he spoke. Most educated people meeting Him then or now would not give him five seconds. He called God, “Papa.” So do I.

The Apostle Peter was presented a vision of all the meats of the world. “Take and eat,”he was told.

Peter replied, “My lips have never touched anything common or unclean.”

Peter then was told, “What God has cleaned do not call unclean.”

Peter then was asked to visit the home of a Gentile. This is forbidden to Orthodox Jews.

Peter says, “I had a vision that showed me I am to call no man unclean.”

When Peter gets there everyone receives the gift of the Holy Spirit BEFORE Peter begins to speak.

Peter states, “The LORD is not a respecter of person but in all lands those who love and do good are loved by God.”

A fellow named Simon Brown sends out fiery emails weekly denouncing the Roman Catholic Church and the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Conventionally The Trinity is given as The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost. It might also be given in the word of Paul as Faith, Hope and Love.

“The greatest of these,” writes Paul, “is love.”

Love is also the most lacking.

I have included the comment from Heidi Glasgow, “This has as much to do with real faith as Trump has to do with compassion,” for a reason.

I surfed the web to find out who she is. She is a bureaucrat.

“You will encounter in your travels folks of your own age who chose the institutional path, who became administrators rather than doers. These folks chose to serve an institutional authority in exchange for a paycheck, and these folks are going to be with you for the rest of your life, and you who come up off the street, who live without certainty day to day and year to year are going to have to bear with being called children by these institutional types; you will, as Shakespeare tells us, endure ‘the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes.’ “It is not childish to live with uncertainty, to devote oneself to an idea rather than an institution. It’s courageous and requires a courage of the order that the institutionally co-opted are ill equipped to perceive. They are so unequipped to perceive it that they can only call it childish, and so excuse their exploitation of you.”– David Mamet, TRUE AND FALSE. (Edited)

In 1970 in Hollywood I found myself experiencing a change of heart for the better. A man of God consciously broke the law of the land to help me. In that moment I realized there are two laws. Who I would become I knew depended entirely upon which of those two laws I chose to break.

The law of the land divides. It builds walls.

The law of God unites. It tears down walls.

The best writing I have found on the Holy Trinity is not found on Simon Brown’s fiery site.

It is found in the pages of presumed atheist Aldous Huxley’s THE DEVILS OF LOUDON. I have included it and more in this post.

I obtained a full sized authorized replica of THE SHROUD OF TURIN, the burial cloth of Jesus, for knowledge not faith.


Not only is it, it also speaks more clearly than the other four and all the writings in THE NEW TESTAMENT to the Passion, Death and Resurrection of Jesus. I got it for myself. That is a good thing. It is a good thing because along with The Shroud came a letter stating I have the right to exhibit it around the world.

In 1968 in THE I CHING I read that the Superior Man is like the wild goose. When he finds food he does not hoard it for himself. He calls to his mates.

Everyone I have offered to take the Shroud to except one man has dismissed it saying, “I have faith. I don’t need it.”

These were churchmen.

The one man who said, “Yes. Bring it to my place, please,” owns a tavern, a public house.

This is right. For during his life Jesus was not made welcome in churches, synagogues and temples.

He was made welcome in public houses and taverns.

That one man was John Maxwell who owns Dora Keogh’s and Allen’s on The Danforth in Toronto.

Some Christians see drinking alcohol as a sin.

Jesus Christ sure as Hell did not. He turned water into wine.

Missing from the language of those who claim to speak for Jesus is the profound gentleness of THE NEW TESTAMENT. In fact, listening to most preachers we get the impression God is a fearsome fellow in whose company we must always behave ourselves. Little comfort in his house.

Heidi represents fully the immense poverty of convention.

Read THE NEW TESTAMENT in the version by Greek poet Richard Lattimore. He began his translation as an atheist. He ended it as a man no longer an atheist. Forget the authorized translations. They all lack balls.

Celebrate Easter with Reg Hartt at Dora Keogh’s. It is a great Irish pub at 141 The Danforth, Toronto. I will be bring my Shroud Of Turin replica.

Dora Keogh’s has a fine bar. One of the finest in this city.

The man who turned water into wine stood five foot eleven. He was built like a lumberjack. He was as strong as an ox. He was dirt poor. When he spoke he dropped his aitches. Not very many who think themselves learned would listen to him then or now.

If you think you can’t join us because we are sinners, well, what are you?

Look to the log in your eye. Please forget about the dust in mine.

Note to Jehovah’s Witnesses: Yes, I know your Faith forbids you to come.

It is time you got a greater faith.

I have Faith the best will come to Dora Keogh’s. I hope to see all who read this there. I will love meeting you all. So will John and Dora.

While you are at it read Thomas Cahill’s HOW THE IRISH SAVED CIVILIZATION. I have read it twenty times through always with profit. You will too.

It is time to drink a toast to Jesus with good Irish whiskey.

If the church you belong to says you can’t you know Jesus would not be welcome there.

He most certainly is welcome where I AM. He is most welcome where I AM. As are you.

–Reg Hartt, 02, 05, 2017.



Reg Hartt as Christ by Bruce Simpson.

 Three things will last forever—faith, hope, and love—and the greatest of these is love.” (  )

“My lips have never touched anything common or unclean.”–Peter.  (   ).

“What God has cleaned do not call unclean.” (   ).

BBC Shroud Of Turin  (   ).


“Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. The mediocre mind is incapable of understanding the man who refuses to bow blindly to conventional prejudices and chooses instead to express his opinions courageously and honestly.”–Albert Einstein.

“So long as (man) cannot operate as a savage or less than a savage, and think as a god, or better than god, he will suffer…A man who is full of God is outside of faith…When a man is truly creative he works single-handed and he wants no help. A man acting alone, on faith, can accomplish what trained armies are incapable of doing. To believe in one’s self, in one’s own powers, is apparently the most difficult thing in the world…Whenever an English artist of any value has arisen he has been marked as Public Enemy No. 1.”                                                                                                                              –THE COSMOLOGICAL EYE, Henry Miller.

“Admit, assume, because, believe, could, doubt, end, expect, faith, forget, forgive, guilt, how, it, mercy, pest, promise, should, sorry, storm, them, us, waste, we, weed-neither these words nor the conceptions for which they stand appear in this book; they are the whiteman’s import to the New World, the newcomer’s contribution to the vocabulary of the man he called Indian. Truly, the parent Indian families possessed neither these terms nor their equivalents.”-Ruth Beebe Hill, HANTA YO.

“He who without the Muse’s madness in his soul comes knocking at the door of poesy and thinks that art will make him anything fit to be called a poet, finds that the poetry which he indites in his sober senses is beaten hollow by the poetry of madmen.”-Plato.

“Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth that the  ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one’s favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now.” William Hutchison Murray   ( )

“Most teachers say you should go to school to get your degree to have something to fall back on. Aside from being a huge lie, that also creates a very high level of mediocrity, because nobody who really believes that is going to take the leap of faith required to be a serious artist. Stay out of school.”–Ellis Marsalis to his sons Branford, Delfeayo and Wynton.

“You have no need that any man should teach you.”-1 John 2:27.

“Film students should stay as far away from film schools and film teachers as possible. The only school for the cinema is the cinema.”-Bernardo Bertolucci.

“We make an idol of truth itself; for truth without charity is not God, but His image and an idol, which we must neither love nor worship.”—Pascal

“Any system built on belief functions through the operations of guilt and hypocrisy. Such a system, whether of acting, training, meditation, self-improvement, etc., functions as a pseudo-religion, and is predicated on the individual’s knowledge of his or her own worthlessness. The system holds itself out as the alleviator, cleanser, and redeemer of the guilty individual.

“Now, none of us is free of self-doubt, and none of us is free of guilt. We all have thoughts, feelings, episodes, and tendencies which we would rather did not exist.

A guilt-based educational system survives through the support of adherents who were guilty before they signed up, who came to classes and failed (how could they do otherwise, as the training was nonsense), and were informed that their feelings of shame—which they brought in with them—were due to their failure in class, and could be alleviated if and only if the student worked harder and ‘believed’ more.”—David Mamet, TRUE AND FALSE Heresy And Common Sense For The Actor, pgs. 86, 87.

Introspection, observation and the records of human behaviour in the past and at the present time make it very clear that an urge to self-transcendence is almost as widespread and, at times, quite as powerful as the urge to self-assertion. Men desire to intensify their consciousness of being what they have come to regard as ‘themselves.’ But they also desire—and desire, very often, with irresistible violence—the consciousness of being someone else. In a word, they long to get out of themselves, to pass beyond the limits of that tiny island universe, within which every individual finds himself confined. This wish for self-transcendence is not identical with the wish to escape, from physical or mental pain. In many cases, it is true, the wish to escape from pain reinforces the desire for self-transcendence. But the latter can exist without the former. If this were not so, healthy and successful individuals, who have (in the jargon of psychiatry) ‘made an excellent adjustment to life,’ would never feel the urge to go beyond themselves. But In fact they do. Even among those whom nature and fortune have most deeply endowed, we find, and find not infrequently, a deep-seated horror of their own selfhood, a passionate yearning to get free of the repulsive little identity to which the very perfection of their ‘adjustment to life’ has condemned them (unless they appeal to the Higher Court) without reprieve. Any man or woman, the most happy (by the world’s standards) no less than the most wretched, may come, suddenly or gradually, to what the author of THE CLOUD OF UNKNOWING calls ‘the naked knowing and feeling of thine own being.’ This immediate awareness of selfhood begets an agonizing desire to go beyond the insulated ego. “I am gall,’ writes Hopkins,

“I am gall. I am heartburn. God’s most deep decree
Bitter would have me taste: my taste was me;
Bones built in me, flesh filled, blood brimmed the curse.
Selfyeast of spirit a dull dough sours. I see
The lost are like this, and their scourge to be
As I am mine, their sweating selves; but worse.’

Complete damnation is being one’s sweating self, but worse. Being one’s sweating self, but not worse, merely no better, is partial damnation, and this partial damnation is everyday life, is or consciousness, generally dulled, but sometimes acute and ‘naked,’ of behaving like the average sensual human beings we are. “All men have matter of sorrow,’ says the author of THE CLOUD, ‘but most specially he felleth matter of sorrow who knoweth and feeleth that he is. All other sorrows in comparison to this be but as it were game to earnest. For he may make sorrow earnestly that knoweth and feeleth not only what he is, but that he is. And whoso never felt this sorrow, let him make sorrow; for he hath never yet felt perfect sorrow. This sorrow, when it is had, cleanseth the soul not only of sin, but also of the pain it hath deserved for sin; and also it maketh a soul able to receive that joy, the which reaveth from a man all knowing and feeling for his being.’

If we experience an urge to self-transcendence, it is because, in some obscure way and in spite of our conscious ignorance, we know who we really are. We know (or to be more accurate, something within us knows) that the ground of our individual being is identical with the Ground of all knowing and all being; that Atman (Mind in the act of choosing to take the temporal point of view) is the same as \Brahman (Mind in its eternal essence). We know all this, even though we may never have heard of the doctrines in which the primordial Fact has been described, even though, if we happen to be familiar with them, we may regard these doctrines as so much moonshine. And we also know their praqctical corollary, which is that the final end, purpose and point of our existence is to make room in the ‘thou’ for the “That,’ is to step aside so that the Ground can come to the surface of our consciousness, is to ‘die’ so completely that we can say, “I am crucified with Christ; nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.’ When the phenomenal ego transcends itself, the essential Self is free to realize, in terms of a finite consciousness, the fact of its own eternity, together with the correlative fact that every particular in the world of experience partakes of the timeless and the infinite. This is liberation, this is enlightenment, this is the beatific vision, in which all things are perceived as they are ‘in themselves’ and not in relation to a craving and abhorring ego.

The primordial Fact that That art thou is a fact of individual consciousness. For the purposes of religion, this fact of consciousness has to be externalized and objectified by the projection of an infinite deity, standing apart from the finite. At the same time the primordial Duty of getting out of the way, so that the ground can come to the surface of the finite consciousness, is projected outwards as the duty to win salvation within the framework of the Faith. From these two original projections religions have derived their dogmas, their theories of meditation, their symbols, their rules and precepts. Those who conform to the rules, who worship the mediators, who perform the rites, who believe in the dogmas and adore a God ‘out there,’ beyond the finite, may expect, with the aid of divine grace, to achieve salvation. Whether or not they achieve the enlightenment, which accompanies the realization of the primordial Fact, depends on something other than the individual practice of religion. In so far as it helps the individual to forget himself and his ready-made opinions about the universe, religion will prepare the way for realization. In so far as it arouses and justifies such passions as fear, scrupulosity, righteous indignation, institutional patriotism and crusading hate, in so far as it harps on the saving virtues of certain theological notions, religion is an obstacle in the way of realization.

The primordial Fact and the primordial Duty can be formulated, more or less adequately, in the vocabulary of all the major religions. In the terms employed by Christian theology we may define realization as the soul’s union with God as a Trinity, a three in one. It is simultaneously union with the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost—union with the source and Ground of all being, union with the manifestation of that Ground in a human consciousness and union with the spirit which links the Unknowable to the known.

Union with any single person of the Trinity, to the exclusion of the other two, is not realization. Thus, union with the Father is a knowledge, by ecstatic participation, of the Ground in its eternal essence and not, at the same time, in its manifestation in the finite. The completely liberating and enlightening experience is that of the eternal in time, the non-dual in multiplicity. For the Bodhisattva, according to the Mahayanist tradition, the world-obliterating ecstasies of the Hinayanist Sravaka, are not realization, but barriers to realization. In the West the assault on Quietism was motivated by ecclesiastical considerations and resulted in persecution. In the east the Sravaka was not punished; he was merely told that he was on the wrong track. “The Sravaka,’ says Ma-tsu, ‘is enlightened, and yet gone astray. The ordinary man is off the right path, and yet in a way enlightened. The Sravaka fails to perceive that Mind as it is in itself knows no stages, no causation, no imagination. Disciplining himself in the cause, he has attained the result and abides in the Samadhi of Emptiness for ever so many eons. However enlightened in his way, the Sravaka is not at all on the right track. From the point of view of the Bodhisattva this (the abiding in the Samadhi of Emptiness) is like suffering the tortures of hell. The Sravaka has buried himself in emptiness and does not know how to get out of his quiet contemplation, for he has no insight into the Buiddha-nature.’

Unitive knowledge of the Father alone, excludes a knowledge of the world as it is ‘in itself’—a multiplicity manifesting the non-dual Infinite, a temporal order participating in the eternal. If the world is to be known as it is ‘in itself,’ there must be union not only with the Father, but with the Son and the Holy Spirit as well.

Union with the Son is the assimilation of the personality to a model of loving selflessness. Union with the Holy Spirit is at once the means to, and the fruit of the individual’s self-transcendence into loving selflessness. Together they make possible the awareness of what, unconsciously, we enjoy at every moment—union with the Father. In the cases where union with the Son is pursued too exclusively—where attention is centered upon the humanity of the historical mediator—religion tends to become an affair, outwardly, of ‘works’ and inwardly of imaginings, visions and self-induced emotions. But in themselves neither works, nor visions, nor emotions directed towards a remembered or imagined person are enough. Their value, so far as liberation and enlightenment are concerned, is purely instrumental. They are means to selflessness (or to be more precise, they may be means to selflessness) and thus make it possible for the individual, who does the works, or sees the visions and feels the emotions, to become conscious of the divine Ground in which, without knowing it, he has always had his being. The complement of works, imaginings and emotions is faith—not faith in the sense of belief in a set of theological and historical affirmations, nor in the sense of a passionate conviction of being saved by someone else’s merits, but faith as confidence in the order of things, faith as a theory about human and divine nature, as a working hypothesis resolutely acted upon in the expectation that what began as an assumption will come to be transformed, sooner or later, into an actual experience, by participation, of a reality which, for the insulated self, is unknowable.

Unknowableness, we may remark, is normally an attribute not only of the divine Ground of our being, but also of much else that lies, so to speak, between this Ground and our everyday consciousness. To those, for example, who undergo tests for ESP, or prevision, there is no perceptible distinction between success and failure. The process of guessing feels exactly the same, whether the result be a score attributable to mere chance, or markedly above or below that figure. This is consistently true of test situations in the laboratory. But it is not always true of situations of a more significant kind. From the many well-authenticated cases on record it is clear that ESP and prevision sometimes take place spontaneously, and that the persons in whom they occur are aware of the event and strongly convinced of the truth of the information which is being conveyed. In the spiritual field we find analogous intuition, the normally unknowable makes itself known, and the knowledge is self-validating beyond the possibility of doubt. In men and women who have achieved a high degree of selflessness, these insights, from being rare and brief, may become habitual. Union with the Son through works and union with the Holy Spirit through docility to inspiration make possible a conscious and transfiguring union with the Father. In this state of union objects are no longer perceived as related to an insulated ego, but are known ‘as they are in themselves’—in other words, as they are in relation to, in ultimate identity with, the divine Ground of all being.

For the purposes of enlightenment and liberation, a too exclusive union with the Spirit is no less unsatisfactory than a too exclusive union with the Father in world-obliterating ecstasy, or with the Son in outward works and inward imaginings and emotions. Where union with the Spirit is sought to the exclusion of the other unions, we find the thought-patterns of occultism, the behaviour-patterns of psychics and sensitives. Sensitives are persons who have been born with, or have acquired, the knack of being conscious of events taking place on those subliminal levels, where the embodied mind loses its individuality and there is a merging with the psychic medium (to use a physical metaphor), out of which the personal self has been crystallized. Within this medium are many other crystallizations, each one with its blurred edges, its melting and interpenetrating boundaries. Some of these crystallizations are the minds of other embodied beings; others, the ‘psychic factors’ which survive bodily death. Some, no doubt, are the idea-patterns, created by suffering, enjoying and reflecting individuals and persisting as objects of possible experience, ‘out there’ in the psychic medium. And, finally, yet others of these crystallizations may be non-human entities beneficent, malicious or merely alien. Foredoomed to failure are all those who aim exclusively at union with the Spirit. If they ignore the call to union with the Son through works, if they forget that the final end of human life is the liberating and transfiguring knowledge of the Father, in whom we have our being, they will never reach their goal. For them, merging with spirit, with every tom, Dick and Harry of a psychic world, most of these inhabitants are no nearer to enlightenment than we are, while some may actually be more impenetrable to the Light than the most opaque of incarnate beings.

Obscurely, we know who we really are. Hence our grief at having to seem to be what we are not, and hence the passionate desire to overstep the limits of the imprisoning ego. The only liberating self-transcendence is through selflessness and docility to inspiration (in other words, union with the Son and the Holy Spirit) into the consciousness of that union with the Father in which, without knowing it, we have always lived. But liberating self-transcendence is easier to describe than to achieve. For those deterred by the difficulties of the ascending road, there are other, less arduous alternatives. Self-transcendence is by no means invariably upwards. Indeed, in most cases, it is escape downwards into a state below that of personality, or else horizontally into something other than the ego, but not higher, not essentially other. We are trying to mitigate the effects of the collective Fall into insulated selfhood by another, strictly private fall into animality and mental derangement, or by some more creditable self-dispersion into art or science, into politics, a hobby or a job. Needless to say, these substitutes for upward self-transcendence, these substitutions for upward self-transcendence, these escapes into subhuman or merely human surrogates for Grace, are unsatisfactory at the best and, at the worst, disastrous.—Aldous Huxley, THE DEVILS OF LOUDON, pgs. 71—77.




« »