Inner Versus Outer

In all religions and philosophical orders it appears that there is an inner and an outer doctrine. There is one belief system presented to the masses, and another to the inner initiates. In order to know the real doctrine, often you have to be a member of an elite society, and even then make sure you are part of the inner circle. In many cases it would seem, the lower ranking members of the society are purposely lied to while others are given the "secrets."

Modern Christianity, at least the Protestant version, tends to disagree with this, quoting Paul's message that said, "but if our gospel be hidden it is hidden to those who are lost." Of course, this evokes a serious question regarding, what does it mean to be lost? The Roman Catholic Church is more into symbolism and allegory but does not share that with the Roman Catholic laity. Why not?

It is said of the Masons as well, that they have a secret doctrine for the elite that is not shared with those of the lower degrees, and apparently not all of those in the higher degrees. It is argued however, that this is more of a sinister organization. I would argue that some branches of it are and some aren't.  I am not a mason however, and have no interest in becoming one, not to mention being any part of their more secret "inner sanctum."

Jesus however, regardless of how you interpret Paul's message, made it clear that there was an inner and an outer division of believers. To those outside Jesus said, "I speak to them in parables, that in seeing they may see not, and in hearing they hear not." There was the literal version, and the allegorical version. At least that is one way of putting it. In the literal version of Christianity, Christ's death was a sacrifice, (like the sacrificial lamb) for our sins, that we might be saved and declared righteousness. In an allegorical version. Christ's death would be a "death of the ego, and his resurrection would be a new life lived in accordance with the "way," or in Chinese terms, the Tao. Interestingly, the word Tao, (regardless of its being an English version of a Chinese symbol, is written, usually with a T rather than a d, although it sounds somewhere in between the two letters) starts with a T which is a symbol for the cross, upon witch a sacrifice is made and we change from the horizontal axis of time and space to the vertical axis of eternity. The A is a symbol for the ox, or for great power and the O for the sun. So Tao can be a symbol for sacrificing great power to the sun, or in other words, sacrificing our personal power to the universal sun symbol, the symbol of life, and the symbol of the universe, and the symbol of the Son. By giving up our ego we allow the "sun" to flow through us, and become one with the way. So is the allegorical version right? Or is the literal? Or could they both be right. I leave that up to the reader to decide. At any rate, the I Ching too, has an inner and an outer meaning. But what do we make of it?

More on this later.