In my last post I talked about goodness. Yet evil or non-being should be addressed as well separately. And how it fits in, is not altogether clear when we have a perfect, all-good universe. How this is to be largely parsed is problematic, but I have faith it can be done to a large extent nonetheless
If there is One Will that is all good, how could there be an epiphenomenon, which claims doership, and is seemingly contrary to the good? It seems at least that the idea of the bad, of the appearance of evil, should have its source in the One Source. Yet again, here it would appear we are maligning God, ascribing to him bad qualities which, if He had not, we would not even be able to derive the illusion from Him. It would be a conundrum as to how evil exists and one would naturally gravitate towards the source of evil in things like free will and creatures. This I am against largely because of the incapacity of human beings' finitude manifesting evil in other ways, such as in most goods having some sort of bad drawback being as it were inherent in their core essence. Once again, the idea of feeding on formerly living food, or earthquakes and volcanoes being a necessary outcome of the earth having a magnetosphere, and so on.
It is not individual egoic minds that are behind these things, but a Universal Mind, and this brings into the picture the notion of Providence.
Providence and Universal Mind
Moderator: Moderators
-
Dimmesdale
- Sage
- Posts: 783
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 7:19 pm
- Location: Vaikuntha Dham
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 89 times
-
Dimmesdale
- Sage
- Posts: 783
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 7:19 pm
- Location: Vaikuntha Dham
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 89 times
Re: Providence and Universal Mind
Post #2[Replying to post 1 by Dimmesdale]
In the great spiritual "channelled" document A Course in Miracles, a certain metaphysics is chalked out to the effect that we are all, in our core identity, the Christ having a dream of separation and duality. In the beginning all was one, but there crept a "tiny mad idea" of separation at which point, duality, pleasure and pain, love and fear, were born due to some inconceivable misunderstanding. And now we are here, in bodies, trapped in a nightmarish dream.
As we can see from what I wrote about the all-good universe, this metaphysical system appears incompatible. Indeed, the universe in ACIM seems predicated on negativity, that this was somehow "our fault" that this illusory world and our illusory self has its source in some kind of "fall" akin to the Garden of Eden. This in spite of the fact that, as far as Reality is concerned, the bad dream never really happened. That in fact "ideas leave not their source" and we are still at One with God.
To my mind this explanation, if it can qualify as such, tells more about our attitude surrounding what we experience rather than the experience in and of itself and what it means.
Yes, there is suffering as far as the ego is concerned, and the ego ascribes it to the world at large, that it is the cause of suffering even if we suffer because of our fundamental misunderstanding. Nevertheless the world, it seems, is a source of suffering. Thus we naturally want to defuse it, and render it a nonstarter metaphysically, as being of any use spiritually. If our misunderstanding is the spark, then the world is dynamite.
In the great spiritual "channelled" document A Course in Miracles, a certain metaphysics is chalked out to the effect that we are all, in our core identity, the Christ having a dream of separation and duality. In the beginning all was one, but there crept a "tiny mad idea" of separation at which point, duality, pleasure and pain, love and fear, were born due to some inconceivable misunderstanding. And now we are here, in bodies, trapped in a nightmarish dream.
As we can see from what I wrote about the all-good universe, this metaphysical system appears incompatible. Indeed, the universe in ACIM seems predicated on negativity, that this was somehow "our fault" that this illusory world and our illusory self has its source in some kind of "fall" akin to the Garden of Eden. This in spite of the fact that, as far as Reality is concerned, the bad dream never really happened. That in fact "ideas leave not their source" and we are still at One with God.
To my mind this explanation, if it can qualify as such, tells more about our attitude surrounding what we experience rather than the experience in and of itself and what it means.
Yes, there is suffering as far as the ego is concerned, and the ego ascribes it to the world at large, that it is the cause of suffering even if we suffer because of our fundamental misunderstanding. Nevertheless the world, it seems, is a source of suffering. Thus we naturally want to defuse it, and render it a nonstarter metaphysically, as being of any use spiritually. If our misunderstanding is the spark, then the world is dynamite.
-
Dimmesdale
- Sage
- Posts: 783
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 7:19 pm
- Location: Vaikuntha Dham
- Has thanked: 28 times
- Been thanked: 89 times
Re: Providence and Universal Mind
Post #3[Replying to post 2 by Dimmesdale]
So it is wise to get rid of the dynamite. And thus "overcome" the world. But is this not rather something to be sequestered in the psychological category, rather than projecting it (as the Course so poo-poos) into the metaphysical sphere? I think this is the actual problem with the course, and what the Course brands as the "tiny mad idea" or space-time, is in effect something much more benign: Providence.
Providence it was that created the world. Why it had in mind pain and suffering and evil, is due to a Perspective that, while grounded in Universal Mind, is necessarily STRAINED through into ego, and, I would argue, pulled FROM ego, into itself, like an infinite loop, from all time.
Supposing there is omniscience, transtemporal knowledge, the Ego was foreseen as what it was before it was even manifested. And it was manifested as it was foreseen. Thus ego comes from outside, but it was "drawn", by providence, from nothing, ex nihilo, due to the impingement of this Being on Nothingness.
That is where I am tending.
So it is wise to get rid of the dynamite. And thus "overcome" the world. But is this not rather something to be sequestered in the psychological category, rather than projecting it (as the Course so poo-poos) into the metaphysical sphere? I think this is the actual problem with the course, and what the Course brands as the "tiny mad idea" or space-time, is in effect something much more benign: Providence.
Providence it was that created the world. Why it had in mind pain and suffering and evil, is due to a Perspective that, while grounded in Universal Mind, is necessarily STRAINED through into ego, and, I would argue, pulled FROM ego, into itself, like an infinite loop, from all time.
Supposing there is omniscience, transtemporal knowledge, the Ego was foreseen as what it was before it was even manifested. And it was manifested as it was foreseen. Thus ego comes from outside, but it was "drawn", by providence, from nothing, ex nihilo, due to the impingement of this Being on Nothingness.
That is where I am tending.
