必要的扭曲——基督第三人格（二）

?此段摘自《灵魂永生》第二十一章  宗教的意义

﹀

﹀

这第三位历史人物，用你们的话说早已诞生过了，他是整个基督人格的一部分，当时担负了一个宗教狂热分子的角色。

这个人有超强的能量和力量，也有了不起的组织能力，但是他的无心之过却让一些危险的曲解延续了下来。对那个历史时期的记录是分散且互相矛盾的。

这个人在历史上叫保罗或扫罗。他当时的任务是来建立一个架构。但它应该是一个理念的架构，而不是规则的架构；是人的架构，而非团体的架构。他在此跌倒了，而在未来他将以刚才提及的第三人格的身份重新回来。

所以，从这个角度来讲，并没有四个人格。

且说，这位扫罗不遗余力地将自己定位为一个独立的身份。比如说，他的个性似乎和历史上的基督有很大区别。他是在一次强烈的个人经验中“皈依”基督教的——这件事是为了使他着重个人的面向，而非组织的面向。但他早年的一些功绩被归于基督——这里的“早年”不是指他的青年时代，而是更早时。

所有的人格都有自由意志，并且解决他们自己的挑战。扫罗也不例外。不过，正如我们现在对事件的理解，这种在组织方面的“扭曲”在历史架构里也有其必要性。因此，扫罗的倾向在另一个层面上是人所共知的，而且自有其用处。然而，也正因如此，他将再度出现，这一次他是来消除那些扭曲的。

其实，他并不是主动制造了那些扭曲，并将之强行推入历史现实的。他创造它们是因为他发现自己不得不承认某些事实：在当时的世界，要想让基督教的观念与无数其他学说和宗教区分开来，要想在衰弱的各派系中间维持住它，则必须拥有世俗的权力。他的工作就是去建立一个有形的框架；而甚至在当时他就担心这个框架会扼杀了那些观念，但他别无他法。

但当这第三人格重出江湖时，他不会再被称作保罗，却将集三个人格的全部特性于一身。

保罗试图否认知道自己是谁，直到他有了皈依经验之后。以比喻的说法，他代表了自己一个渐渐衰弱的部分——这一部分与他自己的知识作对，而且极其专注于俗世生活。表面上看，他从一个极端走到了另一个极端，从反对基督而后又支持他。但内在的激情始终存在——他内心的熊熊烈火，他长久以来试图隐藏的认知一直都在。

他代表的是与物质实相打交道并操纵其间的部分，因而这些特质在他身上很强大，而这些特质也在某种程度上反客为主。当历史上的基督“死”后，保罗则把灵性观念落实在具体行动中，继续传教。可是，他就这样种下了一颗“组织”的种子，而正是这个组织压制了这些灵性观念。他在基督之后还活了一段时间，恰如施洗约翰在基督之前来到。这三个人的生命重叠了一段时间。

约翰与历史上的基督各自履行了他们的角色，并且对自己的所作所为感到满意。只有保罗最终并不满意，因此未来那个基督会围绕着他的人格而形成。

这些人格所属的那个“存有”——你们可称之为“基督存有”——是觉察到这些问题的。而具有肉身的三位却无所觉知，虽然在出神和升扬的状态中，他们已经得知了许多。

保罗也代表了人的好战天性，这必须根据当时人类的发展来考虑。当下一位基督人格出现时，如你所知，人类那好战的特质将全然改变并被完全扬弃，因此适合保罗出场。

伴随着这些发展，人的内在本性将在21世纪把它自己从过去的许多束缚中解放出来。一个新时代真的会开始——并非一个人间天堂，而是一个远为健全、公正的世界，人们远比现在更清楚自己与地球的关系，清楚自己在时间之内的自由。

The third historical personage, already born in your terms, and a portion of the entire Christ personality, took upon himself the role of a zealot.

This person had superior energy and power and great organizing abilities, but it was the errors that he made unwittingly that perpetuated some dangerous distortions. The records of that historical period are scattered and contradictory.

The man, historically now, was Paul or Saul. It was given to him to set up a framework. But it was to be a framework of ideas, not of regulations; of men, not of groups. Here he fell down, and he will return as the third personality, just mentioned, in your future.

In that respect, however, there are not four personalities.

Now Saul went to great lengths to set himself as a separate identity. His characteristics, for example, were seemingly quite different from those of the historical Christ. He was “converted” in an intense personal experience—a fact that was meant to impress upon him the personal and not organizational aspects. Yet some exploits of his in his earlier life have been attributed to Christ — not as a young man, but earlier.

All personalities have free will and work out their own challenges. The same applied to Saul. The organizational “distortions,” however, were also necessary within the framework of history as events are understood. Saul’s tendencies were known, therefore, at another level. They served a purpose. It is for this reason, however, that he will emerge once again, this time to destroy those distortions.

Now he did not create them on his own, and thrust them upon historical reality. He created them in so far as he found himself forced to admit certain facts: In that world at that time, earthly power was needed to hold Christian ideas apart from numberless other theories and religions, to maintain them in the middle of waning factions. It was his job to form a physical framework; and even then he was afraid that the framework would strangle the ideas, but he saw no other way.

When the third personality reemerges historically, however, he will not be called the old Paul, but will carry within him the characteristics of all the three personalities.

Paul tried to deny knowing who he was, until his experience with conversion. Allegorically, he represented a waning faction of the self that fights against his own knowledge and is oriented in a highly physical manner. It seemed he went from one extreme to another, being against Christ and then for him. But the inner vehemence was always present, the inner fire, and the recognition that he tried for so long to hide.

His was the portion that was to deal with physical reality and manipulation, and so these qualities were strong in him. To some extent they overruled him. When the historical Christ “died.” Paul was to implement the spiritual ideas in physical terms, to carry on. In so doing, however, he grew the seeds of an organization that would smother the ideas. He lingered after Christ, just as John the Baptist came before. Together the three spanned some time period, you see.

John and the historical Christ each performed their roles and were satisfied that they had done so. Paul alone was left at the end unsatisfied, and so it is about his personality that the future Christ will form.

The entity of which these personalities are part, that entity which you may call the Christ entity, was aware of these issues. The earthly personalities were not aware of them, although in periods of trance and exaltation much was made known to them.

Paul also represented the militant nature of man, that had to be taken into consideration in line with man’s development at the time. That militant quality in man will completely change its nature, and be dispensed with as you know it, when the next Christ personality emerges. It is therefore appropriate that Paul be present.

In the next century, the inner nature of man, with these developments, will free itself from many constraints that have bound it. A new era will indeed begin — not, now, a heaven on earth, but a far more sane and just world, in which man is far more aware of his relationship with his planet and of his freedom within time.