Traditions involving food at Christmastime can be an important part of a family celebration, especially when they recall something deep and meaningful. For “my people”, the Norwegians from whom I descend, there has been a tradition on my father’s side of the family to serve lutefisk at Christmastime. Let me modify that…to serve a God-awful-smelling-and-rather-gelatinous-fish called Lutefisk. It seems this fish-eating tradition is a carry-over from the old country, where this whitefish was historically preserved in lye – the word “lutefisk” translates to “lye fish” – which then had to be soaked back out of the fish before eating. And for some reason, when you cook it, it stinks to high heavens. I recall someone once saying the Norwegians in northern Wisconsin, where I grew up, were a people that left Norway, travelled half-way around the world, and didn’t stop until they found a place as cold and miserable as the one they had left. So what this lutefisk tradition really speaks to me about is the hardiness of these people. When viewed this way, that fish doesn’t smell half-bad. The Guide teaches in Lecture #246 Tradition: Its Divine and Distorted Aspects (pathwork.org/lectures/tradition-its-divine-and-distorted-aspects/) that it is important to keep the deeper meaning of traditions alive, and when they no longer serve in that way, to let them go. In a similar way, people oftentimes follow diet-related restrictions that have lost their link to anything meaningful. To continue them, says the Guide, can be senseless. From Polishing Off Jesus: Question: In the traditional Scriptures of Judaism and Islam, the texts are specific regarding the consumption of fish, flesh, and fowl; it is commanded that “of their flesh shall we not eat.” But in the fifteenth verse of Matthew, Jesus said, “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth the man, but that which cometh out of the mouth.” Christianity, in fact, has no ban against pork, but during Lent, dietary restrictions are observed by Christians. So are the dietary laws based on that which is unclean, or on that which is holy? The Guide: The dietary laws were given at a time when human beings’ scientific and hygienic knowledge was so insufficient that such information was connected with religion. Merely sanitary or health reasons dictated them. In certain periods of history, under different circumstances, the laws were changed. Nowadays, it is unnecessary for religion to set up such rules. At no time did these laws have anything to do with spiritual life. They were merely safeguards to protect health. So what made sense then no longer makes sense now. There were just totally different circumstances. To take over these laws today is nothing more than superstition. But new dietary laws should certainly be established, according to today’s circumstances. And many of you are really attempting to do this. The spirit behind following dietary laws, or dietary common sense, is very different. In the former case, following a dietary law is done in an attitude of blindness, as if it were a magical means of attaining the grace of God. If humanity at this time still clings to them as a spiritual necessity, it shows a gross misunderstanding of what true spirituality is. It shows the superficial approach of humanity – people’s disinclination to think. In the latter case, it is recognized that the personality carries the responsibility to maintain the body in the best possible condition. The desire for this springs from valuing life. Your science today may find certain conditions that make it necessary to observe certain laws as long as the specific conditions prevail. When the conditions change, the laws will be eliminated. To persist in keeping them without any purpose or reason would be senseless. Read more: theguidespeaks.org/polishing-off-jesus/
Posted on: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 12:15:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015