Where does the Seeker begin? We certainly cannot begin at the beginning, because most have been conditioned to accept the pious fraud. This has left most of the world with tremendous gaps in knowledge, lacunas (holes - a missing part) in the ancient classical writings. However there are also the ellipsis (the three dots "...") that historians insert, not always because something is missing, but because they are uncomfortable with what was written. Without a knowledge of our past we don't know to what we can return; and, it is impossible to know where to begin until we know where we are going.
The problem is our guideposts, the written language that should point the way, have been defaced or replaced by confusing Christian, Jewish and Moslem symbols. None of the ancient markings are left, or if they are, they are so obfuscated they must first be cleared, rebuilt or redefined. But if we must first define all our terms, we will never get beyond definitions. So, it would seem, we must begin with the "mysterious", and make it less of a mystery. That will require some understanding of history - history as it was before the redactors of history rewrote it.
Most Americans are ignorant of history and culture, not culture as, "improvement or refinement by education and training", but culture as, "religious worship". "Improvement or refinement" has little or nothing to do with the essence of culture. For it is in culture, as culture originated at the beginning of civilization, that we find the root of all ancient spiritual knowledge. It was also in culture, as "improvement or refinement by education and training", that spiritual knowledge was lost.
There are those who like to believe they posses knowledge handed down over the centuries; but for the most part what they posses is little more than concepts that have been sanitized by Christian theology. What one must seek is something more, much more; and the root of that quest lies buried somewhere in grounds once made fertile by culture - culture as it originated as a "religious worship of nature".
The ancient land was not "cultivated" by the plow or irrigation, but rather through the Goddess "cult". Her rituals were performed in the trice-plowed fields to assure fertility, fertility as expressed in the Latin, "fertilitatem", meaning the reproductive power, of women, the land and an abundance of crops. Cult rituals of the Goddess assured fecundity, and the "Rites of Worship", at least those resulting in "reproductive power", were always sexual. Sex was essential to fertility rites, but sex was not the "essence" of those rites, as Christians claim; and making that assertion, shows gross ignorance.
Sexual Rites imbue the land with "spiritual power" and "spiritual power" is the essence of the Goddess Rites. Sex was only part, a very important part of Goddess rituals, but those rites were centered in spiritual power - real power - the origin of which is the Vortex.
The quest must therefore begin with the intellect. But the Spiritual is not found in intellect. Rather, it is experienced by the most primitive element of our being. And that has been the trap throughout the ages, for it is our primal nature that eschew logic and leads us to embrace ludicrous religious beliefs. Logic confounds belief and belief blinds reason. What we must seek is a blending of that spark within our spirit that I call the "Primitive Mind" and our intellectual mind.
It is only when we can merged these two minds that we can be receptive to the resonance of the Vortex. The Vortex, however is not our end. It is but a physical door through which we enter in order to discover the Spiritual; and it is the path of the Spiritual we must follow to find the Gods. This is the first distinction a seeker of the Spiritual must understand.
The Spiritual is not a moral code or ethics. It is a phenomenon that can be experienced. But caveat, caution here: none of the so-called spiritual phenomenon of the major religions has anything to do with the true Spiritual.
One must take as a premise that we know nothing of the Spiritual today, that the Spiritual of 2000 years ago was so declined as to make it nearly non existent; and, the Spiritual of 5000 years ago was in a state of decay and decline. Once we recognize that spiritual knowledge as it originated 150,000 years ago, is now hidden under many layers of dusty and perverted ideas, we can then begin to uncover that knowledge. To do that we must first understand what the "spiritual" is, not what we believe it to be, but what the "spiritual" really is; and we won't find that understanding in any of today's religions.
Why? Because it doesn't exist. Even if it did we wouldn't know which religion, if any, possessed spiritual knowledge. After all, do a Buddhists monk and a Catholic priest believe the spiritual to be the same? Are either of their concepts of the spiritual the same as those of a fundamentalist Christian's, or those of a Moslem's? How can they be?
The Christian concept of a resurrection is contrary to all beliefs in the transmigration of souls; and Christians can't even agree among themselves as to whether there is a soul, let alone what the soul is. But more importantly, most modern religious beliefs don't even relate to the spiritual. Calling a cactus bud or an idol, "spiritual", doesn't make it spiritual, yet physical objects are accepted as being spiritual in the mind and imagination of many people; and from these natural objects men imagine religious experiences.
Most people never have a "religious experience", and those who have an experience they wrongly believe is spiritual seldom seek the experiences of other religions. A fundamentalist Christian does not seek Islam or Buddhism, just as Moslems and Buddhist do not embrace other religions. They are content with what they have. And when they become discontented, they seldom seek anything different.
As a consequence none of the adherents of those religions realize that the experience Christians call being "born again" is essentially the same experience a Buddhist has in being "enlightened", which is the same experience the fundamentalist Moslem has in reaching a state of "bliss". It is the same experience, yet each believes what he experienced is a "spiritual" manifestation unique to his religion. How can it be unique? How can it even be spiritual? How can three gods who are based on three completely different and antagonistic concepts, give the same spiritual manifestation that confirms diametrically opposed ideas?
Reason dictates the "spiritual" cannot be experience in three contradictory manifestations. The experience of being "born again", or nirvana, or whatever the religion my call it, is a natural phenomenon produced by mental, physical, external and internal stimuli. Calling natural phenomenon "spiritual" does not make it so. All it does is create a new, false, religion, within the individual.
It must be made clear that the spiritual is not created in the imagination; and that is precisely where all the spiritual nonsense of today comes from. Neither is the spiritual a "concept" nor is it a belief. It is not prayer, emotional feelings or intellectual knowledge; and most certainly it is not the manifestations of nature. The wind is no more a god than is a golden statue; and too often the manifestations of nature and spiritual phenomenon are taken as being the spiritual itself.
The idea of calling physical manifestations of nature, "spiritual" is as old as mankind, and has its roots in the beginning of time, as Plutarch so aptly relates in Isis and Osiris 69-71:
The spiritual can be seen and experienced - though not by everyone and certainly not whenever the profane chooses - but when the spiritual is present, it is seldom recognized.
"The Phrygians believe that God sleeps in the winter and wakes in the summer; so they sing lullabies to him in the winter and rousing songs to him in the summer, like Bacchic dancers. The Paphlagonians say that he is bound and imprisoned in winter, and walks abroad again at liberty in spring.
"But the nature of winter season make us suspect that the rituals of mourning were prompted by the disappearance of grains and fruits. And yet the ancients did not actually believe that they were gods, but rather great gifts of the gods, essential for their preservation from a savage and bestial life. And when they was the fruits dropping and disappearing entirely from the trees, and the grains which they had sown still starved and puny, they would scrape the soil away with their hands and lay it back again, thus committing the seeds a second time to the ground with uncertain hopes of their ever reappearing or coming to ripeness. Therein they did many things which were like what people do at funerals, when mourning for the dead.
"But we used to say of one who had bought the books of Plato that he had bought Plato, and of one who was acting the comedies of Menander that he was playing Menander. So they too did not shrink from calling the gifts and creature of the gods by the names of the gods and paying them honor and veneration for their usefulness to themselves. However, the men of after times took the practice up blindly and ignorantly and applied to the gods the vicissitudes of their crops, and the coming and going of the gifts so necessary to them. They not only called them births and death of gods, but actually believed they were that. They filled their minds full of grotesque, unsanctioned, and distorted notions, even though they had plain before their eyes the absurdity of their irrational ideas... Among the Greeks there are... they... silly enough to say that Lachares stripped Athene, that Dionysius cropped off Apollo's golden locks, and that Jupiter Capiolinus was burned and destroyed during the civil wars at Rome, and before they realize it, they have imbibed and absorbed the vicious opinions that go with such language."
If the so-called "great religions" of the world have all come to different conclusions as to what the spiritual is, how can anyone accept what they teach? Or how can we expect to be given the answer in 25-words or less?
Understanding the spiritual requires rethinking your concepts. The Hindu aphorism "to whatever god you pray, Brahma will answer", is based on the false belief that there is one god who will hear all prayers. And of course that one god is Brahma, or Jesus, or Allah, etc. This is as fanciful as the answers people imagine they receive but which are without spiritual significance. Understanding the Spiritual requires some esoteric knowledge, and presenting esoteric knowledge to the "profane" is not an easy matter. Yet it is the profane who insists on answers to questions they care nothing about.
This was made very clear to me when I was giving a lecture at a university and I remarked that the Name of The Goddess was always kept secret from all but the High Priest and The High Priestess of Her Order - that the name was never spoken or revealed outside the Priesthood. One of the students in the audience asked if I knew the name of The Goddess, and when I said that I did, he asked, "What is it?"
How do you respond to such crass ignorance? What good would that knowledge have done him? It isn't that he really wanted to know Her name, what he wanted was to know the unknown - "to stick his head in a dark hole, to see what he could see". That's human nature, and though curiosity may get answers in science, curiosity for the sake of curiosity leads nowhere in the spiritual. We must seek knowledge to gain knowledge, but knowledge does not impart understanding. And we must know a great deal and understand much before we can know the unknown.
The idea that Spiritual is not found through curiosity is not easy to comprehend because the western world has no understanding of religious Mysteries. That lack of understanding is due to the fact that the trinity religions have no mysteries, at least not in the classical sense.
The destruction of knowledge and the corresponding loss of mysticism over the past 2,000 years has been so devastating that we can hardly begin to imagine what once existed. Nor is that knowledge being resurrected in the man-made rituals of the Neopagans who recently appeared on the scene. They know about as much of ancient wisdom as do the Christians. They seek, but don't know where to look, and everywhere we turn for knowledge we find the lies of history shrouded in a Pious Fraud. To paraphrase an aphorism, uncovering the pages of history through the rubble of Christian repression is like peeling an onion; the more you remove the more you cry.