The Fundamental Unity of Being

[Iolaus]

I agree completely.

[Jehu]

I agree completely.

Excellent, then let us proceed to the path.

The path cannot be differentiated from the sentient being who travels it, for the two are neither one and the same nor completely different, and although all sentient beings travel the path, it is the “right path” that we will speak of here. By “right path”, I do not mean to imply that there is but one true path, but only that there are two ways in which an individual may travel their particular path: either they are progressing toward enlightenment or they are regressing into deeper states of ignorance – for as I said before, there is no standing still on the path. In the Buddhist tradition, the path that leads to liberation is called “wholesome” or “right”, while the path leading to greater ignorance is called “unwholesome” or “wrong”. For this reason, we must take Socrates’ advice to heart and ensure that every step we take carries us in the intended direction.

The “form” or appearance of the path is “right view”, and this is precisely what we have been developing within this thread; however, it will not suffice to simply accept the doctrine on blind faith, but it must be clearly seen through the faculty of reason. The “essence” of the path is “right resolution”, and this is accomplished through a thorough logical analyse of phenomena. The path is “embodied” in “right language”, that is to say, we perceive the state of a sentient being's wisdom by the language with which the express themselves. For example, a person who continually speaks of things as having an external and separate existence are still in a state of delusion, and so are prone to speak in terms of “I”, “me” and “mine”, or that others are causing them pain or distress. The “potency” of the path lies in “right action”, and the action may be of body, speech or mind. The enlightened being will always do what is appropriate in any given situation, and is not bound by any set of laws or rules (human or divine), but by their own innate sense of what needs to be done. The function of the path is “right livelihood”, and the term “livelihood” here entails far more than simply how one earns a living; in fact, it entails every possible way in which ones life impacts upon the rest of creation; the simple rules being “Take only what you need to live, and do no harm.” These are the five elements that constitute the manifestation body of the path. Next, we will consider the recompense body: “primary cause”, “conditions” (secondary causes), “effect” and “recompense”; but first, have you any questions?

[Iolaus]

Jehu,

The path cannot be differentiated from the sentient being who travels it, for the two are neither one and the same nor completely different,

Well this here is an interesting statement that bears some contemplation.

either they are progressing toward enlightenment or they are regressing into deeper states of ignorance

A troubling statement. I had considered that people can gravitate toward evil and get mired there a long time, so I guess that is the same thing. (I think that is what masters such as Jesus were warning about, and did not mean to imply that it was eternal.) I just had not considered that a person could become more ignorant. And yet, I do agree that being evil implies both ignorance, and even a kind of insanity. At the same time, I try to understand how this is compatible with high level evil beings, who may be very intelligent and very experienced, i.e., wise.

The “essence” of the path is “right resolution”, and this is accomplished through a thorough logical analyse of phenomena.

What exactly is right resolution, and how do you differentiate it from right view?

The function of the path is “right livelihood”, and the term “livelihood” here entails far more than simply how one earns a living; in fact, it entails every possible way in which ones life impacts upon the rest of creation;

As I mentioned before, I have inner conflict over my job as a nurse, especially now that I work on a cancer ward where the stakes are higher and therefore the scam more serious. I have come to see that most of the patients are not ready for any real level of self motivation, and must be living out their karma or something. They are so passive and incurious. When the occasional one shows some spirit, I always encourage it.

Of course, there are many opportunities for right actions - general kindness and compassion, as well as continual forgiveness and kind treatment toward coworkers, who sometimes behave badly (not too often).
However, I am shortly going to cut my hours significantly, and spend time on a couple of projects that I hope will be of benefit to humanity, especially Americans.

[Jehu]

At the same time, I try to understand how this is compatible with high level evil beings, who may be very intelligent and very experienced, i.e., wise.

Wisdom and evil actions are completely incompatible, and we must never confuse intelligence with what is mere cleverness.

What exactly is right resolution, and how do you differentiate it from right view?

As I explained before, a form must have an essence wherein it dwells, as a recognizable mode of distribution which the mind recognizes. Now, given that right view is a particular way of examining things, based upon a purely deductive (rational) analysis, as apposed to science, which is founded on primarily inductive (empirical) analysis. Therefore, while both sides employ analysis (the resolving of things into their constitutive elements), the one leads to the truth, and the other leads only to theories and supposition. Unfortunately, the scientific path has proved to be very enticing, for it has given man unimaginable powers, but power in the hands of the ignorant cannot but lead to disaster.

However, I am shortly going to cut my hours significantly, and spend time on a couple of projects that I hope will be of benefit to humanity, especially Americans.

It is always wise to follow your heart in such matters, for no matter how deeply into the dream a person is, there is always a channel open to the Absolute, so long as we have an ear to listen.

[Sapius]

Jehu, sorry for the very late response…

S: The very initial question that I had in the very beginning of this thread, still stands, and I ask again; what justifies a self-caused "entity"?

J: It is reason that justifies the existence of the self-caused entity.

Given the time you put into enquiries, that is quite a disappointing response. However, definitions can be adjusted to mean and fit a certain kind of reasoning, so it is not actually “reason” per say, but the use of subjective definitions that set the rules of reasoning to begin with.

I think what you may actually imagine is, it is an eternally/perpetually self-causing entity, rather than a self-caused entity, but I was actually trying to point and question, why does IT (existence) have to necessarily be an ENTITY. What exactly makes an entity an entity? Is existence an entity apart or above any other entity?

J: Given that there are only the two possible modes or manners in which an entity may be constituted, and given that the “other-caused” (relative) mode is fully dependent upon the antecedent existence of its causes, it follows that there is either an infinite regression of other-caused entities underlying the appearance of all things – which is logically untenable, or there is a single “self-caused entity” which is the ultimate cause.

What exactly is there to “logically” defend as far as ‘turtles all the way’ is concerned? Why does it have to necessarily be an “entity” and not merely such a system of regress itself, that be considered as the “ultimate cause” if that is what one (Jehu or me) is egotistically after? After all, I don’t think that that would interest the absolute entity in either way, because logically speaking, according to the conclusion of our enquiry, it is always the absolute that is aware, so that means that the absolute is egotistically involved from either side, hence no point to logical reasoning or argument, or enquiries for a start. Now is there?

S: And how can such an entity have anything “intrinsic” when “it” doesn’t/can’t have an “extrinsic” to begin with?

J: It is inappropriate to speak of the Absolute as beginning, for such an entity is immutable, and so is without beginning or end (eternal). Such an entity, if it exists, must necessarily have always existed; for it contains within itself all that is necessary and sufficient to its being what it is.

Now how and why exactly did such a stupid thought of the ‘beginning’ of the Absolute (existence) suddenly jump in? How exactly did you interpret that from what was said above? Or are you deliberately trying to ignore the question by throwing in something totally irrelevant? I think it is called misdirection. On the other hand, you seem to be so overly obsessed and blinded by your own (Jehu’s) beliefs that you hear nothing except your own voice… and I believe that to be a more plausible reason, so that actually worries me.

S: Further more, an “entity” without a cause cannot be considered an entity to begin with, if it is, then what exactly is distinguishing that? A non-entity?

J: Indeed, but the Absolute is not without a cause, it is its own cause. Further, given that the nature of the Absolute is cognizant (awareness and knowledge), it is itself both subject and object.

So it is both, the subject AND the object, at the same time/instant I presume; so now what do we do about the ‘excluded middle’ here then? Or are we supposed/allowed to conveniently ignore the laws of logic here? Are you saying that 'awakening' ultimately requires that the laws of logic/nature be abandoned?

S: And even further more, there has to necessarily be some other “entity” to consider any “other” entity, AS “entity” to begin with, otherwise there would be absolutely nothing! Which I think/hope is not what you are suggesting.

J: Yes, this is quite right, but there is no requirement that the objective (relative) entities be real, only that the subjective (absolute) entity be real. However, when I say that relative entities do not really exist, I do not mean that they do not exist at all, but that their existence is not how it appears; for they are not truly possessed of the characteristics (properties) that the subject observer posits to them.

Yes, I know, you do NOT really MEAN they do not exist at all, and so I’ve heard it expressed in different terms by different people, but what I don’t get is, given that all wish and claim to be speaking the Truth, why speak that which one does not MEAN? Doesn’t that qualify for a lie? Or at least half-a-lie, for that is definitely not the whole truth; now is it?

Again, I am not contending that the Absolute ever brought itself into a state of “being”, for such an event would be impossible – there being no state of “non-being” from whence it might have arisen; however, it is the ground from which all relative entities arise, and to which they must all eventually return.

And why exactly that can’t be a ‘regress’? I mean that ‘turtles all the way’ thing? From which all things arise and eventually return to? I’m sure, being an expert and all that, you could come up with an appropriate philosophical definition to adjust ‘regress’ (turtles all the way) to replace the absolute.

Why can’t existence purely be a relative ‘thing to a thing’ experiential transformation of that which already and eternally is - simply existence, rather than returning to and from any “absolute entity” as such? Is it not “WE” who could be imagining, due to egotistical reasons/helplessness, that things come from somewhere and return back to? Where exactly would a thing come from or return to if existence is a Constance (immutable) and cannot be apart from or above than any such happenings itself? Something happen-ing is as eternal as the entity existence, so I choose ‘happening’ over ‘existence’ to be named as the Absolute. Any reason I should not?

If you ask me, the ideas that you have been so interested in, studied and of course have been quite impressed by, do not actually allow you realize where and when has logic left the building, otherwise you will not claim with a straight face that something is neither this nor that, (which actually says or means nothing coherent), and on other occasions that it is this, but/yet it is also that at the same time.

[Blair]

Jehu's not an expert in anything, except being a charlatan.

But in all fairness, he/she/it doesn't know this yet.

Such is the exquisite beauty of life.

[Sapius]

Well, that is one of my goals, to break out of that.

Yes, but this is the paradoxical aspect of reality, for we cannot achieve liberation without that we have the desire to do so, however, the desire for liberation can be the most formidable obstacle to its attainment.

Before we return to the subject of the path, there is one more door of enquiry that we should explore. We have said that the absolute cannot be perceived through the physical sense faculties, however, we are possessed another faculty whereby the absolute can be perceived – this being the faculty or reason. Therefore, let us see what the Principle of Interdependent Complementarity (the First Principle of reason) can tell us with respect to the Absolute. I believe that you will find this interesting, for it answers such questions as, “Why, if God is the creator of all things, is there evil in the world?”

Consider the case of Good and Evil, for example, if God is good, then how is it that there can also be evil? How is it that two seemingly apposing principles can arise from the same entity. Traditionally, this question has been addressed by the introduction of a sort of “anti-God”, the devil or Satan, but this is not the truth of the matter. First, good and evil are not opposing principles locked in a perpetual struggle to dominate one another, but two complementary principles locked in a state of harmonic balance. Further, only one of these principles (good) partakes of an absolute existence, while the other (evil) is only apparent. Good, being an inherent quality of God (the Absolute), is ever present, while evil, comes and goes in accordance with its causes and conditions. When we say that someone is evil, this does not mean that they are devoid of any good, but only that there inherent goodness is obscured by ignorance and delusion; as a consequence of which they do evil things. Enlightenment, dispels ignorance, just as the light dispels the darkness, and as a result, one’s innate goodness shines through. So you see, while God is the ultimate origin and cause of all thing, the ignorance and delusion of sentient beings are what causes evil to manifest.

What!? The Absolute (a.k.a. Existence) is all Good? :-O

On this… all I can say is good luck with your enquiry; I better let you concentrate on awakening Iolaus. . Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Jehu :)

[Iolaus]

Jehu,

Wisdom and evil actions are completely incompatible, and we must never confuse intelligence with what is mere cleverness.

Perhaps I get the idea from movies and novels. Lord of the Rings, for example, has a high-level evil being. It has a certain wisdom from intelligence, study, experience. It may apply psychology in situations to overcome its victims, and it might know science or for that matter occult techniques very well. And, I do think that there are what we might call disembodied beings, entities, that operate close to our reality but not easily perceptible to us, and that these beings have a variety of levels of spiritual attainment, as we do.
____________
I was trying to distinguish right view from right resolution, as they seem similar.

[Jehu]

I was trying to distinguish right view from right resolution, as they seem similar.

Right View is the form or appearance of Right Path, and like all forms, abides as a unique and identifiable pattern of distribution within the appropriate sort of essence; in this case Right Resolution – the term “resolution” here is used in accordance with its original sense “to separate or cause to separate into constituent parts”. This process of resolving (analyzing) things into their constituent parts will, if done by valid (deductive) reasoning, lead one to the valid conclusion that all things are devoid of any intrinsic causes, and are not real, but only apparent; however, if the same analysis is undertaken employing inductive reasoning (empirical methodology), it will merely lead one to hypothesize new and increasingly complex modes of being – such as is the case with modern physics (e.g., virtual force carrying particles).

[Iolaus]

So right view abides within right resolution? Right resolution is the essence of right view? The practice of right resolution leads to right view?

[Jehu]

So right view abides within right resolution? Right resolution is the essence of right view? The practice of right resolution leads to right view?

In a manner of speaking, but not in the sense that the essence of a relative entity is its constitutive causes. Remember, the elements of which we speak here are applicable to “all” things, but are not themselves things, and so cannot rightfully be named; nevertheless, if we are to speak of them individually, it is necessary that we assign each its own unique designation (i.e., form, essence, embodiment, etc.).

In addition to the Five Elements that constitute the Manifestation Body of Right Path, there are four additional elements which comprise its Recompense Body: “primary cause”, “secondary cause”, “effect” and “recompense”. The primary cause is Right Effort, and when combined with the secondary cause, Right Mindfulness, the effect known as Right Concentration is attained, the recompense of which is Tranquil Mind (equanimity).

Tranquil Mind then becomes the primary cause of that which is called Wisdom, and along with the secondary cause called Realization, gives rise to the effect called Enlightenment, the recompense of which is called Liberation.

[Iolaus]

Well now that is very nice; I don't know how you remember all this stuff. How does recompense relate to effects? It's a kind of effect?

[divine focus]

Evil is interesting, because there are levels of mastery on the evil side. The devious ones serve as catalysts for growth once there influence is uncovered. Their power is your power. (No victims.)

[Blair]

In addition to the Five Elements that constitute the Manifestation Body of Right Path, there are four additional elements which comprise its Recompense Body: “primary cause”, “secondary cause”, “effect” and “recompense”. The primary cause is Right Effort, and when combined with the secondary cause, Right Mindfulness, the effect known as Right Concentration is attained, the recompense of which is Tranquil Mind (equanimity).

Tranquil Mind then becomes the primary cause of that which is called Wisdom, and along with the secondary cause called Realization, gives rise to the effect called Enlightenment, the recompense of which is called Liberation.

Oh you are so very droll and serious,aren't you. About this enlightenment business..

Whatever is your grasp on absolute truth, it's so dry you could single-handedly mop up the atlantic ocean.

Try throwing in a few metaphors, parables or such, so that we, the common people, can relate to what you are saying and understand better the divine truths which you endow from upon high. Your fakers chair.

I'm sure Iolaus will appreciate it, at least.

[Carl G]

Jehu will do the dry thing and ignore you. Jehu will not stoop to making personal remarks about personal things. Jehu is here only to speak about the ultimate truth and cannot be baited into even thinking about this for a second of what we humans call time. So, save your breath.

[Jehu]

How does recompense relate to effects? It's a kind of effect?

Yes, recompense is the consequence of one’s own personal impact upon the Universe – through one’s acts of body, speech and mind. To better understand this, one should know that everything stands in an interdependent and complementary relationship to its environment (all that which it is not), and as a consequence, whatever impact a given thing has upon its environment will ultimately have an impact upon the thing itself. Consider the case of a tree, for example, which is dependent upon the soil in which it is rooted. If a tree were to destroy the nutritional qualities of that very soil by way of the leaves that it shed each fall, the soil would soon be unable to support the continued existence of the tree, and so it would die. Fortunately, for the tree, its leaves do not destroy the environment, but add vital nutrients to the depleted soil, and so the tree is able to continue it existence for its allotted time.

Recompense then can be either supportive of a thing, or non-supportive, depending upon whether or not the thing is functional or dysfunctional. Remember, everything has a “function”: an appropriate mode of activity whereby it fulfils its intended purpose. Such things as fulfil their purpose are said to be “good” and find continued support from their environment, while things that do not fulfil their purpose are deemed “not good”, and are eventually discarded. This is not the workings of some vengeful God, it is simply the Principle of Interdependent Complementarity at work; for as Master Loa said, “the TOA is neither humane nor inhumane”.

Further, there is no escape from recompense, for given that all beings are existentially one and the same, one’s eventual death does not free one from the affects of one’s previous deeds.

[Iolaus]

Divine Focus,

Evil is interesting, because there are levels of mastery on the evil side. The devious ones serve as catalysts for growth once there influence is uncovered. Their power is your power. (No victims.)

I agree, and I am quite interested in understanding evil beings better.

[Iolaus]

Jehu,

Recompense then can be either supportive of a thing, or non-supportive, depending upon whether or not the thing is functional or dysfunctional. Remember, everything has a “function”: an appropriate mode of activity whereby it fulfils its intended purpose. Such things as fulfil their purpose are said to be “good” and find continued support from their environment, while things that do not fulfil their purpose are deemed “not good”, and are eventually discarded. This is not the workings of some vengeful God, it is simply the Principle of Interdependent Complementarity at work; for as Master Loa said, “the TOA is neither humane nor inhumane”.

It fits one of my theories, which is that good is the same as that which is pro life.

You've not written anything I can disagree with for two whole posts now. In a row.

[Jehu]

It fits one of my theories, which is that good is the same as that which is pro life.

You've not written anything I can disagree with for two whole posts now. In a row.

Are you saying that you agree with what I have said because you see it to be the truth, or that you accept what I have said simply because it accords with your previous theories regarding the truth?

[Iolaus]

I'd say some of both.

Where do people get these great avatars?

[Blair]

recompense is the consequence of one’s own personal impact upon the Universe – through one’s acts of body, speech and mind. To better understand this, one should know that everything stands in an interdependent and complementary relationship to its environment (all that which it is not), and as a consequence, whatever impact a given thing has upon its environment will ultimately have an impact upon the thing itself.

Right, and you have no recompense from you were a young one? ever squash an ant, kill a butterfly?

You spout your shit off like a hypocritcal fucking idiot, have you looked at yourself closely enough?

Your posting this bullshit ongoing on this thread causes me distress, so where does that fit in to your scheme of things? What are you going to do about that? ignore it? think you are above it?

You fucking poser douchebag, fuck off.

You sicken me.

[Iolaus]

Oh, Prince.
I thought you were progressing.
By the way I asked you a question on a Worldly thread.

[Blair]

Where?

[Iolaus]

The one about women, freedom and abortion.

Jehu!

Where are you? My answer wasn't wrong, was it?

[Jehu]

Where are you? My answer wasn't wrong, was it?

No, your answer wasn’t wrong, but I was a little surprised by your question: “Where do people get these great avatars?”.

Have you no questions regarding the path?