In today’s world of distractions, it is getting difficult to separate fact from fiction on a mundane level, let alone a spiritual one.

Thanks for your thorough answer. Currently I am working with the “meditation” series, backed up with Laurency. Perhaps one of the thirteen guardian angels will dig my efforts. Taking my fictions less seriously is an engaging activity. Fact and fiction can be sniffed out with some effort and some quiet reflection and practice, and… Your courses on hylozoics/reality are my favorite tonic Kazim – Peace!

A subscriber of mine is working on an App, which allows him to hone his Hylozic knowledge. The app threw up a question for me. I thought I would share my answer to the question with you. How do you think you would have answered the question?

According to Hylozoics Reconstruct the three aspects of reality and explain:
their equivalence
why none can be reduced to the others
what error occurs if one aspect is treated as primary

Answer:

In Hylozoics, reality is explained through three aspects: matter, motion, and consciousness. They are said to be equivalent in basic status, irreducible to one another, and each becomes distorted if treated as the sole primary principle.

Their equivalence
The three aspects are equivalent because none is more fundamental than the others; each is an equally real way of describing the same reality. Hylozoic thought rejects the idea that one aspect can stand in for all reality, saying instead that the cosmos requires all three together.

Why none is reducible
None can be reduced to the others because matter without motion would be inert, motion without consciousness would leave experience unexplained, and consciousness without matter would lack a field of manifestation. In this view, each aspect is necessary for the others to appear as real and intelligible.

Error of primacy
If one aspect is treated as primary, the result is an ism: materialism if matter is made primary, dynamism or mechanism if motion is made primary, and idealism or psychism if consciousness is made primary. The error is that the chosen aspect gets inflated into “everything,” while the other two are downgraded or explained away, which hylozoics regards as a one-sided and misleading reduction.

A concise way to state the hylozoic position is: reality is one, but it has three inseparable aspects, and any philosophy that absolutises only one of them becomes incomplete.

I saw your second post, and I am glad you are suitably illuminated. What I would say is that whatever ideas you hold, they have to be coherent to you. The Lord Buddha said we should trust our common sense more than any of his pronouncements. Hylozoics gives you a framework. It is a working hypothesis until you check its validity yourself, objectively. That happens on the Causal planes and beyond!

Thanks Kazim – regarding The Planetary Hierarchy. I have read in Laurency that there is a break in contact with the Hierarchy and modern Theosophy. I feel a bit odd asking the following question: do we progress on our studies of the works of Masters on faith of what we read? It is understood that Masters don’t lightly mix or never mix with aspirants. Are there people living today that have direct contact or are they long gone, all of them? Perhaps you could share your principle conviction – your experience with those of the higher realms. One reads the stories, one practices the principles and gets a result, but there must be something else. Perhaps you can point me in some profitable direction. -william

Laurency was at pains to dissociate himself from whatever persona he had. That has not stopped people speculating about who he was. If you read his text carefully, you can see that sometimes he talks of the causal world from first principles, indicating that he is talking from experience, not hearsay. Others have said his master was Hilarian (Bailey). Whatever the case, what he says makes sense, and that is all that matters.

I have begun reading the Laurency material in earnest. The combination of his work, and your masterclasses provides a 1-2 punch of serious learning! I learned of Laurency here on this website. He has written an essay on “The Black Lodge” that is stunning. I am stunned to the core, wide-eyed in amazement. I suspect Laurency is activated on the causal plane; where else could he have gotten his knowledge? What a pleasure it is to have this treasure trove of tools for evolution into the heights!

As always – thanks Kazim!