The single-minded will to love

[Pam Seeback]

To be single-minded in willing love is to will from the realization of one's infinite causal nature, as man's infinite causal nature is that which is universally shared among realized and unrealized beings alike. To will to love in all circumstances is akin to think as God would think, for God causes all things including those things considered (by the infinite-unrealized) to be the antithesis of love.

Only that which is universal and singular of will belongs to love. For the universal-realized willing God, nothing would be mocked, condemned, or excluded, for to do so would cause the effect of the error of double-mindedness.

'Existence' or 'The Infinite' or 'The Totality' or 'The Causality' can be substituted as concepts to replace the concept of 'God'. I used the concept of 'God' because it has the advantage of suggesting an existing self or a subject which is how we as humans think of I-awareness. Where the concept 'God' personalizes, 'Existence' et al do not.

[Dan Rowden]

I used the concept of 'God' because it has the advantage of suggesting an existing self or a subject which is how we as humans think of I-awareness. Where the concept 'God' personalizes, 'Existence' et al do not.

I think this is your mistake. This is not an advantage but a disadvantage. In fact it's potentially the worst sort of concept of "I" that a person can have; one of virtual deity. It makes it possible for an individual to perceive their every action as divine and inevitable, which understood wisely is true, but if understood within the parameters of an actual, active Ego, spells potential disaster, for wisdom, if nothing else.

[Pam Seeback]

I used the concept of 'God' because it has the advantage of suggesting an existing self or a subject which is how we as humans think of I-awareness. Where the concept 'God' personalizes, 'Existence' et al do not.

I think this is your mistake. This is not an advantage but a disadvantage. In fact it's potentially the worst sort of concept of "I" that a person can have; one of virtual deity. It makes it possible for an individual to perceive their every action as divine and inevitable, which understood wisely is true, but if understood within the parameters of an actual, active Ego, spells potential disaster, for wisdom, if nothing else.

In relation to your interpretation, not a mistake at all because it is not a view of being a deity. Note that I said that the use of the concept "God" has the advantage of suggesting a self or a subject, not of believing oneself or God to be an existing self. The purpose was to propose a concept that potentially provides a sense of having a meaningful connection with the mystery that forms both nature and man's thinking worlds.

My original post was based on the acceptance of subjectivity as truth which, of course, accepts an infinite number of subjective views. God as Infinite Subjectivity knocks ego on its backside. Perhaps I should have been clearer.

Putting the notion of "God" aside, the core idea of my post was intended to be that at some point in our journey, the need to form a single principle or value upon which we form our identity must happen or what are we doing but bouncing from value to value feeling and acting contradicted? And that while this single-minded value captures our identity as if it is absolute, the wise individual knows it is not, instead, that it is relative to all other subjective value identities and is subject to change according to wisdom's will.

My will to love is my will to love - I fully realize that it has nothing to do with your will to ???, if indeed, you think in such terms.