Lynnea Urania Stuart - Her Passsionate Philosophy

THIS WEBSITE IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

Lynnea Urania Stuart - Her Passionate Philosophy

About Lynnea

Lynnea Urania Stuart (1956- ), known corporate secretary, steam engineer, construction estimator, loan processor, dreamspeaker-philosopher, is also known for her writings, most notably in the magazine, Shabbat Shalom (1990-1991), her blog, Loving Innocence Loving Innocence,and for her book, The Tessara, in which Lynnea describes her philosophy and dreamspeaking practice in detail.

Spiritual Development

Lynnea grew up in a violent Lutheran environment and knew isolation from an early age in Fullerton, California. Lynnea was forced to memorize Luther’s Small Catechism as part of a mandatory “confirmation.” She never accepted this confirmation as anything but a violation imposed upon her by the Lutheran Church. The Bible was a book that was parceled out on the basis of liturgical readings which did not allow presentation of the entire Bible. These were inconsistencies that drove her to other churches, where she learned teachings of various sorts. In the process, she taught herself sufficient Greek and Hebrew to effect her own translations and to evaluate religionist’s claims on her own, resulting in even more destructive opposition from Christians. Lynnea eventually found refuge among the Norwalk Seventh-day Adventists in 1988.

After her first article in Shabbat Shalom, Lynnea was asked to speak at a lay evangelistic series conducted by the Norwalk Seventh-Day Adventists. She was successful, and was later asked to join a missionary group to Daugavpils, Latvia. Only 45 people were baptized in those meetings in which the Norwalk Adventists had expected hundreds. Only one was baptized directly from Lynnea’s efforts, a Latvian woman whose dream she interpreted. A few in Norwalk blamed Lynnea for “what went wrong” in Latvia, expecting that hundreds should have been baptized instead. Within a month she faced censure without vote, was threatened with violence, and her missionary papers returned to her without comment. Lynnea left that church, and Christianity altogether, finding solace in her dreaming practices.

Lynnea’s dreaming expanded at an exhausting pace, and she eventually sought instruction from those who understood dreams. She took instruction at a Hermetic temple in November 1995, and continued to serve until 2001 when the temple began to require Roman Catholic membership. From that time she continued her Gnostic rites on a solitary basis, describing herself no longer as a Hermetic Gnostic, but as a “Melissite,” from the Greek melissa=a bee. “A Melissite,” she said, “has realized the state of dreaming at the Briatic level, in which energy is perceived directly and which has a strong association with bees.” Melissite as a name does not represent a religious affiliation at all, but instead represents how a dreamer has advanced.

Gnosticism cannot be evaluated as a monolithic religious system in terms of doctrinal debate. For that matter, it defies what could be considered “religion” at all. Gnosis is a state of realization and is the goal of Gnosticism itself, a state that once realized, changes one forever. Lynnea’s Gnosticism does not follow that of the Valentinians or other Christian Gnostics, but does follow Kabbalah.

Dreaming as Art

Lynnea has long had the reputation of being a prolific dreamer. She is eidetic as are 12% of adults. If she thinks in a certain way, she actually sees what she is thinking in her visual field. In 1972, Lynnea began to experiment with hypnagogic dreams. After reading from Sigmund Freud’s The Interpretation of Dreams, she deduced from Freud’s Theory of Regression the method for incubating hypnagogia and other dreams. Later, in July, 1995, she began the practice of hypnagogic dreamspeaking in which the dreamer establishes a dream continuum while moving awareness between dreaming and waking states to relate what is happening in the continuum without destroying the continuum. From there she advanced to Set-Up Dreaming, as described by the school of Carlos Castasneda, or Waking Induction of Lucid Dreams (WILDS), as described by the school of Stephen LeBerge. A description of these things can be found on Loving Innocence.

By the year 2000, Lynnea had catalogued 36 kinds of dreaming which she delineated in 5 genera:


-Hiereika, Chapter 3, Tessara.

Dreaming practice has also made a difference in Lynnea’s practice of prayer and rites. Prayer doesn’t consist of speaking into the air. The one who prays is also one who dreams…dreaming a prayer, praying a dream. She also recognized dreaming practice as a training ground for the “greater dream,” through which all things consist in the mind of Eheyeh.

Cosmogony

Lynnea’s view of the Universe rejects the Latin view of Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell. Instead, it follows the Kabbalistic view that there are many levels of the universe on various planes, much like the rings of a tree, but that each level higher is vaster than the lower. The basic structure of these levels follows the sephirot of the Kabbalah, and are most simply expressed in terms of the:

What this expresses is a sequence of planes that extend from the most volatile to the most dense, from pure energy to matter. These higher levels are accessed by dreaming practice, as out-of-body episodes. Even the sky with its galaxies are considered raqia, or “expanse”, and applicable to the World of Action, everything being part of the “greater dream.”

Lynnea’s view of the Divine includes a pantheon of many divine and angelic beings, also many species of spirits, all ruled by One Who is neither male nor female and yet both. That Whom most call God, has a multitude of names and aspects, according to Lynnea, but has its highest expression in the Supernal aspects: a masculine Avorot (Father of Lights), a feminine Ima-Shelanu (Mother of Us All), and the Highest aspect of all, Eheyeh (I AM).

The Tessara

In 2005 it appeared that Lynnea would be terminally homeless. She asked herself what she should do to give her death meaning so that it would be more than just a statistic. So she began to write. She wrote a journal of her physical and astral travels. She wrote about dreaming and the techniques of dreaming. She wrote on philosophic topics. The work that emerged, The Tessara (Greek tesssara= four), was so called because it contained 4 sections:

As Lynnea wrote, her philosophy began to congeal. Her situation improved. She built a career. In time she edited The Tessara to its current form. By then she had realized that the sections reflected a greater Tessara in terms of the development of ideas: the flash of the idea, the nurturing of the idea, the articulation of the idea, and the crystallization of the idea. She regarded the “Greater Tessara” as applicable to humanity as well as abstract thought.

Innocence

In 2001, a Lakota friend who was also a Dean of Religious Studies at an east coast university, e-mailed Lynnea, saying, “You are beautiful, smart, and also innocent.” Lynnea couldn’t accept this, saying, “I am not innocent.”

He answered, “You may not accept that you are innocent because of your past. But no matter where you may have been or what you may have done, you are innocent because you never lost your capacity to dream and to wonder, even as a child.”

Though Lynnea initially couldn’t accept her friend’s admonition; later it became the foundation for her philosophy. “To dream and to wonder is true innocence, and upon this the continuance of the world depends…From such things we invent all that mankind has made: the affairs of state and education, the assemblies of worship, and the arts of love; for there is nothing in our world that did not first begin in a dream including you the dreamer. Even your life essence began as a dream in your parents, and that instilled from the mind of God.” –Enthumesia, Chapter 1, Tessara.

Lynnea rejected that innocence could be ignorance, seeing that small children are our example of innocence, and that innocence is something to be preserved. “Why have schools? Why be concerned with moral development? By teaching we would lead children away from ignorance and therefore destroy innocence forever.” – ibid.

Lynnea likewise rejected the claim that innocence is sinlessness or righteousness. “If ever a human demonstrated wrongdoing, it’s a child. That’s why a child needs instruction.” In other words, innocence cannot be righteousness of any sort if there is wrongdoing at all. To say that children can’t be accounted sin because of their lack of understanding falls back on the idea that innocence is ignorance, which was already disproven. – ibid.

Seeing that neither ignorance nor righteousness are innocence, Lynnea rejected the claim that innocence is lost as a result of sexual knowledge, but stated, “The best lover is an innocent one, because the one he loves inspires him to things that are forever, and he would give his life for his beloved and for her children.” Likewise she rejected the idea that “innocence is taken away” as a result of sexual assault, but accepted that harm is genuinely done as a result. By rejecting the tie to innocence took away a social barrier that restricts recovery of the victim.

As pertaining to the courts, Lynnea said, “The courts are a subterfuge…courts can’t judge a heart. They only judge actions through evidence they can see to determine that obsession by which innocence appears to be damaged. When a court declares innocence or guilt, it does so to establish and preserve a milieu where true innocence can flourish.” –ibid.

Lynnea also rejected the prevailing idea that innocence once lost can never be recovered. She regarded innocence as the natural state of humankind, an attribute that is truly descriptive of that state, not just what others may declare a person to be. She also considered innocence to be essential for one to be a true lover. “Therefore if one would answer the call of love, one must also answer the call of dreams.” – Enthumesia, Chapter 2, Tessara.

Truth

Lynnea rejected the idea perpetrated by her Lutheran teachers that truth is “unknowable and unattainable.” They had cited the New Testament account of Jesus before Pontius Pilate where Jesus answered nothing when Pilate asked, “What is truth?” (John 8:38). The presumption was that if the question was answerable, then Jesus would have done so.

Lynnea considered silence to be the perfect answer for a completely different reason. She considered the view of the Hegelians that ideas that clash (thesis and antithesis) would produce a new hybrid idea(synthesis). She asked how much of the thesis and how much of the antithesis should be present in the synthesis. Since the synthesis is the idea to be analyzed, its arguments come from the thesis and the antithesis. So Lynnea proposed 3 concepts by which one may further analyze the interplay of the clash of the thesis and antithesis:

  • Subargument – an argument that supports the greater argument of an idea.
  • Apothesis – the decay of the idea through a subargument expressed as fault discovered in a subargument, loss of a subargument’s relevance, or loss of a subargument’s salience.
  • Prosthesis – a subargument added to defend an idea, yet isn’t solid itself: new scenarios produced by new subarguments or new configurations of old ones, new fallacious offerings of “proof” and propaganda.

From these ideas, Lynnea inferred several things:

  • The broader an idea, the greater number of subarguments support its argument.
  • The more subarguments, the more an idea is prone to apothesis.
  • The more apothesis, the greater the idea’s vulnerability.
  • The fewer apotheses, the greater an idea’s sustainability.
  • Sustainable ideas are more durable.
  • Simpler ideas are more sustainable.
  • Simpler ideas are more durable.
  • The more enduring idea will have the greater long-term impetus.
  • The simpler idea will have the greater long-term impetus.
  • Theses and antitheses we encounter don’t arise out of nowhere but exist as by-products of past syntheses.
  • Conjunctions of ideas more readily happen between simple ideas.
  • Simple ideas maintain a “purity” considered unassailable.
  • Recognition of an idea’s “purity” establishes it as “truth.”

”Purity” of an idea (Pn) is an expression of the state of all subarguments that can be attached to an idea. Lynnea expressed this in mathematical terms:

Pn=1-[(An-Bn)/Ln], Ln is greater than or equal to 1.

An= the number of apotheses in the idea “n.”

Bn=the number of prostheses in the idea “n.”

Ln= the total number of subarguments in the idea “n.”

Lynnea looked at the parametric equation she derived and considered what would happen if the idea was perfectly pure in fact. She added to the equation the limit as the sum of apotheses and prostheses approached zero. The answer hit her like a sledge hammer…a working definition of “truth in essence.”

Truth in essence (Tn) is idea without apothesis because none exists and without prosthesis because none is necessary. Truth in its essence, regardless of the number of subarguments, doesn’t decay. It keeps its import. It remains both relevant and salient. It doesn’t require new subarguments to prop it up. It stands, at least in the system for which it is designed, as “reliable.”

But truth, though often perceived as “truth in essence,” remains in most cases as “relative truth.” This perception is a purely human factor based on the popularity of an idea. In this respect, truth is the exclusive right of the mighty, or at least the right of the popular. Subsequent equations explored the idea of relative truth. –Enthumesia, Chapter 3, Tessara.

Lynnea’s position with respect to “truth in essence” removed objective truth from the debate of whether truth is absolute or relative because objective truth ceased to be a thing of an unattainable and unknowable absolute. For her, truth was much more concrete, which could be evaluated and re-evaluated. Her equations formed a basis for larger analytical models that could be applied more broadly.

The Dual Fountains of Change

Lynnea considered that while innocence provides the most genuine means of change as a product of dreaming and wondering, there is also a version of “those who dream” that also makes change, though not for the better. This is ambition, a trait which many speak of as “dreams” but are in fact not dreams in the true sense.

The difference between the innocent and the ambitious, according to Lynnea, may only be apparent in the way the 2 sides handle truth. The innocent see truth as an objective thing, a guiding principle by which they can set a standard for their own development. The ambitious see truth as entirely relative, malleable, established by the popular force. – Enthumesia, Chapter 4, Tessara.

Living Ideas

Lynnea saw the clash of ideas in terms of individual people as well as clashes of abstract ideas and social movements. She declared to people, “You are a living idea.” Each one is an idea who must realize one’s own sovereignty, and capacity to become Being, or Existenz as described by the philosopher Karl Jaspers. For this, she regarded each person with the right to effect greater reconciliation among other sentient beings (human and non-human), trusting in the dynamics of the “greater dream” for their governance.

To this end, Lynnea recognized that “what matters is to rise in greater purity of one’s self as a living idea, to come closer to Pn=Tn (Purity =Truth In Essence. – Enthumesia, Chapter 12, Tessara.

Reconciliations and Sacrifice

Lynnea’s system demanded greater practical means for reconciling opposing factions, and facilitating less conflicting syntheses of ideas. She noted how the issue of forgiveness was grossly abused within religious bodies, especially in those that assert that if one does not forgive, one cannot be forgiven, and if anyone holds anything against another, that other cannot be forgiven by God. She saw again and again how forgiveness was demanded of parishioners as an instantaneous act that must also instantaneously obliterate memories of infractions, and how those who admitted that they could not do this were always under a burden of guilt regardless of how many baptisms they had undergone; regardless of how much “repenting” they had done, or how much they may pray. She also saw how this teaching was unequally applied between those who were favored and those who were not, with those most favored being the church staff. Lynnea recognized that such teachings actually work to shut down people’s sense of connectedness with both the Divine and one another. For this reason, Lynnea took a completely different approach to the issue of reconciliations.

Lynnea recognized that one must realize that church practices concerning reconciliation are contrived. Unless one can do this; one will always be a plaything of clergy, lay teachers, even politically enterprising members; and be incapable of becoming a sovereign being.

Lynnea also recognized that in most cases, when people claim they have forgiven a person as an instantaneous act, they betray that “forgiveness” in acts of vengeance thereafter, often attempting to cover up the fact. One might be tempted to say that people really don’t genuinely forgive, and that any talk of reconciliation is not really meant for one’s self, even if people claim it is.

Because of these things, Lynnea rejected the idea that forgiveness is an instantaneous act at all, but a process involving a series of releases. Some releases would take longer to achieve than others, depending upon the extent of injury. By considering that injury is often done, it was reasonable to say that any process of reconciliation must follow the order of the “grief cycle:”

If one desires to assist one who is grieved, one’s job would be to work to move the grieving one though the stages of the grief cycle as quickly as possible, knowing fully that the grieving one may take much time in that progress. That time varies from case to case. But the sequence is the same in all cases.

Because coming to acceptance isn’t an instantaneous act, full forgiveness when an infraction has rendered severe injury is an erroneous concept. What one should be aided to do is to release the offender in a manner that is appropriate to each stage of the grief cycle:

Some, especially politicians who claim that forgiveness is necessarily instantaneous, object, saying that forgiveness has nothing to do with denial. But as long as one makes progress in the grief cycle and makes the appropriate release for each stage, one is not harmed thereby. The trouble comes when one does not progress, being stuck in the denial stage, or any other stage.

What makes this approach truly revolutionary is that it affirms each person as a living idea and their right to sovereignty as that living idea. It does not force. It does not impose guilt to subjugate or to achieve a political advantage. It promotes the healing process that was intended from the beginning.-Enthumesia, Chapter 10, Tessara.

One passage, cryptic to many of Lynnea’s teachers had meaning to her:

"Nature persuadeth us that there are pure Daemons, and that evil germs of Matter may alike become useful and good. For 3 days and no longer need ye sacrifice. So therefore, first the Priest that governeth the works of Fire, must sprinkle with the Water of the loud-resounding Sea. Labor thou around the Strophalos of Hecate. When thou shalt see a Terrestrial Daemon, approaching, cry aloud! And sacrifice the Stone, Mnizourin."
-The Chaldean Oracles of Zoroaster

This passage, cryptic to many occultists, had meaning to Lynnea. “The Strophalos, “she said, “was a torus, sometimes of jade, to which was attached a cord of sinew. This Strophalos would be whirled over the heads of worship- pers, spooking away predators like wolves while inducing an altered state of awareness in the worshippers.” She identified the stone through her knowledge of Greek and Hebrew. Her Hebrew studies had given her an acquaintance with Aramaic, a language with many similarities to Hebrew.

”Mnizourin” is a corruption in Greek of what is first written in Aramaic,” she said. “Belshazzar, after profaning the vessels of the temple, saw a hand writing an inscription on a wall. Daniel translated the words, ‘Mne, mne, teqel, upharsin,’ as, ‘Numbered, numbered, weighed, and divided.’ ‘Mne,’ as ‘number’ or ‘account’ is attached to ‘tzorim,’ or ‘stones’” (Daniel 5). Lynnea recalled the clay pieces found in Mesopotamia, called ‘bullae,’ in which trans-actions were recorded as a proto-cuneiform. These were some of our earliest forms of writing, and once studied, changed our ideas on the development of cuneiform as deriving from counting instead of imagery as in Egyptian.

Lynnea considered what our “account of stones” is today. She saw them as the accounting stones kept in our hearts, which hamper our concentration in dreaming and meditation, blocking the well-spring of tears, and interfering with prayer and innocence.

“Forgiveness, like grief, is a process in which one must employ a series of releases appropriate to each stage. Only at the last stage is anyone truly able to sacrifice the stone, and is final and heart-felt,” she said. She cited Joseph, when he revealed himself to his brothers, as an example of one who sacrificed the stone. “Joseph cried out, ‘Cause everyone go out from me!’” (Genesis 45:1)

“That cry is important,” Lynnea said. “When one cries from the heart, that person has come to face those things that are most important, and that the stone is the pressing weight that it is. One must be able to remove the stone from the heart before the heart can be light enough to face a threatening daemon. And even in the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the one judged is brought before Osiris, and his heart is weighed against the feather of Ma‘at, the Goddess of Balance. And the daemons that threaten are shadows, which in their strange ways are close to God.” –Enthumesia, Chapter 11, Tessara.

The Meaning of Life

Lynnea had settled the question of what the meaning of life is far before she realized that she had. It began when she was a school child, who was beaten virtually every day at school where she had never known acceptance, then punished at home for being “involved” in inevitable incidents. Her mother kept a crystal perfume bottle for many years. But one day it tipped over, the stem broke, and the glass chipped. Her mother simply tossed the broken perfume bottle into the trash barrel. Lynnea fished out the bottle and set it on the windowsill of her room. Every afternoon she came in from her latest beating to be greeted with rainbows cast by the broken perfume bottle.

Lynnea identified with the perfume bottle. It was broken and chipped like she was, yet it disbursed light to show how beautiful it is. And in time she realized that this was her job as well…to disburse Light and to show how beautiful it is.

That ‘s the meaning of life Lynnea would recognize, or at least it was the reason for her living. For Lynnea it was no small thing because she had spent years sorting out the effects of prolonged abuse in the name of religion; a sorting that made sense of her dreams, sense of religions, and sense of truth and innocence. “The meaning of life is the easy question,” she said. The meaning of Light is a continuous unfolding.

General Links for Lynnea and Angelfire:

Angelfire - Free Home Pages
Free Web Building Help
Angelfire HTML Library
HTML Gear - free polls, guestbooks, and more!
BLOGSITE FOR LYNNEA URANIA STUART
BLOGSITE FOR LYNNEA URANIA STUART - MT. MERU

Email: LynneaUrania@gmail.com