Course XXXIV - Teaching 15: Theology of the Divine Incarnation

Theologies of “Existence” and Theology of “Non-Existence represent two ends of the conception about the Universe and man.
Theology of Divine Incarnation represents a mean position; it is actually the mean theology of being and non-being.
Also, as fundamental concept is based on the Absolute Unity of God.
Manifestation is illusory, and it is only true the Eternal One, the Non-manifest One, the Ever-Existing Spirit.
Illusion born of ignorance begets in a being the concept of separateness, but an individual being that gets the realization overcomes this false idea and gets necessary enlightenment to understand statically the Absolute Unity of the Universe with God.
The human mind is unable to achieve by itself this understanding.
So, one can properly state, using the concept of permanence, in the conception of this doctrine, that the Divine Permanence in the individual being stops being so as soon as it enters the field of mental perception.
In other words, the human mind is like a thick veil impeding man to know God; a man cannot know rationally God, because he is unable to grasp His mystery, His true essence.
The intimate and natural union between God and man is clouded by concepts of separateness built by one’s mind, which creates an illusion in man, –illusion of unreal, non-existent existence.
That is why wise instructors in this doctrine ever avoided to think up about the Non-manifest One, about It, and oriented his activities according to this characteristic postulate: Everything is illusion; the Eternal One is the Only Truth.
Knowledge of this Only Truth is the highest goal of the student, who must succeed in concentrating entirely his thoughts on only one idea, the Only Idea, which represents out of is concentration as extraordinary state of mental elevation as to produce so wide state of consciousness that the concept of separateness, “You are You” gives up in front of “You are It”.
Mother’s sages ever followed the general guideline of this conception, based on the idea of Being and Non-being.
They understood how strong may be a fervent wish of knowledge, but also they admitted those limitations preventing from a total knowledge about the essence of God.
For instance, if one stated that God and the Universe is one and the same thing, that His Spirit abides on all existing things, and that consequently God evolves and becomes perfect with all existing things, then we would state that what we think up as essentially perfect must become perfect through His manifestation: this is absurd.
If one stated that the Universe is an emanation, a creation of the very substance of God, also this would be absurd, because the Universe is obviously imperfect, as you can easily see. The Universe evolves constantly to become perfect, but, although is like God, never will be God.
Then a duality comes up, a concept about a God detached from His Universe –one perfect, and the other eternally imperfect– which is inconsistent and poses the insolvable mystery as for why Creation came up. The mind has tried similar formulation innumerable times, and never could get a solution or solve the fundamental mystery about why the Divine Manifestation came up.
You can get a vague and general concept about God by means of reason. Intuition widens it, although dimly, and ecstasy may give a clear knowledge about the beatific vision, but will ever be just a reflection, and never direct truth.
But when our mental faculties become more acute through right discursive thought, all this process clarifies and dispels doubts; it is likely that result never is a total knowledge about God, but can produce a sensation of its gradual possession.
Here is the essential significance of Theology, which does not give an answer about mysteries of God, but raises man to Him, and sanctifies and enables man for a more perfect living, although being unable to reveal him great Divine Mysteries about Non-manifestation and Manifestation.
A theologian must keep silent in front of these Mysteries.
In fact, of course the Non-manifest One does not admit a definition. On the other hand, as for the Divine Manifestation, we can admit that privileged beings may consider it as for its indissoluble unity, and glimpse the indestructible Universal Spirit as a whole, and even the Fundamental Principle of the Universe.
Does this mean that we are in front of two different Spirits?
Nothing makes sense for the Non-manifest One. Negation, and even matter, mind and energy make no sense. It has no beginning, end, emptiness or fullness. We use the word “Nothing”, even though the meaning of this word is beyond nothing or something.
We do not succeed in showing the Reality of the Manifestation upon the basis of the Non-manifest One; but Manifestation is the best demonstration of the Non-manifest One, and we can properly state that It Which Is, never stopped being that Which Is Not.
The great game, the mysterious relationship between Non-manifest One and Manifest One is something that a man is unable to grasp. So, as we said, true wise men keep reverently silent in front of this matter, and just think up about manifestation.
And when they consider the Manifestation, state that God, EHS, the Divine Manifestation, is Principle, Only and Absolute Root of the Universal Creation; it is His own essence and existence.
In front of this statement, diverse doubts and questions arise at once and it is necessary to clarify them.
In fact, if God, of course in the field of the Manifestation, is infinite, unknowable, and so on, how can He bring into being this finite, relative, knowable and multiple Universe? How does the non-caused thing bring into being the causality?
Some reply that even in His finite Universe, God never stops being that which He is, and that Creation is an illusion, but in such an event the said illusion would be something different from its originator, and then we would have a Universe totally detached from his Creator and different from Him. Others say God is immense as a whole and inseparably united with His Universe: that all and everything is God. But this explanation implies that all and everything should be static and unchanging, when in fact the constant evolution, the becoming, is the characteristic of the Manifest Universe.
Also there is a tentative explanation: God created something from Himself, like Him, and that He never can become Himself for the whole Eternity.
Even this explanation is not satisfactory, because then God would not be the only absolute principle, for there ever would be something outside Him, which, although similar, would not be Himself.
But it is possible to find a proper answer thanks to the application of the law of analogical opposition.
This law enables to state that God, the Manifestation, has the same essence and existence of the Absolute One, although apparently comes up like that.
The Eternal One offers Himself in such a way that apparently is somebody else: it would seem two instead of One.
While this apparent duality last, God is Eternal essence and existence, and His Universe is permeated by His essence and existence, but this is not essence and existence in Se.
So, through this law of analogical opposition, the Eternal One comes up as finite and conditioned by manifesting Himself, but as soon as the movement of the manifestation stops, everything is again that which was, and He will become again that which never stopped being.
The Infinite One, the Absolute One is just apparently finite in the Universe.
You have seen the theological concept about Manifestation in Se.
Which is now the concept upon which the Universal Creation rests?
There are two theological tendencies about Creation, two concepts that state: one that the Universe co-exists with God and is eternal with Him, and the other that the Universe has been created in the time and not from the eternity. You can see them as the doctrine “ab aeterno” and the doctrine “in tempore”. Both doctrines represent extreme tendencies, which disagree with the mean theological doctrine here considered.
In fact, the whole Creation implies a beginning; so a doctrine “ab aeterno” would be impossible because it would mean a beginning in the Non-manifest One, in which there is no beginning, end or any knowledge. Even the doctrine of a Creation “in tempore” is unacceptable because it would be something detached from the existence of God, and even the aspect of a non-prearranged Creation would be inconsistent. So, we can agree with a mean interpretation.
Creation is eternal as manifestation. Unknowable God contains potentially all aspects and factors determining the Creation. Creation is potentially eternal.
But it is not eternal as expression of God; it is limited in the time, in a period of duration.
It springs up from the bosom of God and withdraws, and later comes back again to the bosom of God. That is why we are told that the Divine Creation of the Universe is potentially eternal and contained in Unknowable God, but actively made for a period of time determined by Knowable God.
Still we expect an answer about how God has instrumented His Universe.
Some people say God made it from the Nothing, in the sense of the Non-manifest One; and others say God emanated the Universe from Himself, from His Own Substance.
Both statements, expressed like that, are not satisfactory because reveal inconsistencies.
If God creates the Universe from Himself, from His Own Substance, one should admit that this eternally simple substance would be composed by the Creation, which is inconsistent, because as we said, the substance of God is eternally simple and cannot stop being like that.
Even He cannot create it from the Nothing because it would mean the existence of something in the Non-manifest One previous to the Creation, and consequently different from God.
There is only one possible interpretation: God made the Universe from His Nothing, but this concept in this sense: from His immense emptiness of potential state, an unknowable state beyond the human mind, and that He created something free, new, previously uncreated and unique with that Nothing.
So, God created the Universe from the eternal, but in the time fixed by the Divine Law. He created it from the immense potential Emptiness of Himself, with His Own Differentiated Substance Itself.
The idea of Being and Non-Being, of Potential and Active, and vice versa, flows through all these concepts.