Wonderfully written and translated. That faith which drives us on every day in the face of what seems to be insurmountable odds against happiness, is all that we really have to keep us sane in an insane world. The things we can control are the most important, as well as knowing what we cannot change or control. Thank you for posting this, it set my mind on fire.
This is part of a new series, though my next piece will be continuing on the Lifting the Veil” theme, with a focus on Tavistock and the “Invisible Empire.” However, the next instalments in this theological series will be “From the Finite to the Infinite: Nicholas of Cusa’s Vision of God” and then “Homecoming: On a Mystical Journey with Rumi.”
Lewis's dream was the defeat of evil, the triumph of good. Certainly a worthy dream, but to date, never achieved except in fantasies, such for ex. as his Space Trilogy and Narnia Chronicles.
It would be nice to see it defeated in the domain of hard fact, as opposed to that of dreams and imaginings.
That can never happen, though, unless its root is extirpated. Evil is cunning. An expert deceiver. Treacherous to the core. It assumes beauty's forms in order to tempt, tantalize, and ensnare.
It is right under everyone's nose every waking second of their lives, yet virtually never seen. Evil knows its blind prey.
Without the presence of evil how can we appreciate good? And isn't our freedom to choose it - or not - also a part of that good? And without even the possibility of evil how can we ever be free?
Both Monism and Dualism are impossible; Nondualism is the path to go. Just as it is the presence and possibility of good that makes evil so terrible so it is the presence and possibility of evil that makes good so desirable. Nothing is more evil than to see innocence - good - corrupted and besmirched; nothing is more good that to see evil overcome and redeemed. Hence good and evil are mutually interdependent.
This is not to argue on the side of evil; it is merely to give the Devil his due. Which is also a part of being good. (I doubt that the Devil ever gives God his due. Far from it: he does his level best to convince us that God is the evil one. And vice versa.)
My thinking sticks within the limits of what I can know, what I can see, feel and experience. Observable, sensible fact call it. And thus for example I never speak of "God," of which some thinker rightly said, "if he's all-loving he can't be omnipotent, if omnipotent he can't be all-loving." That was the God Christians "recognize" & assign specific character traits to. All the other ones that have abounded throughout history have their own peculiar features and attributes as assigned to them by their promoters. All such are beyond my range of experience I'm afraid.
In order to distinguish differences between things they can't all be the same. If everything were the same there would be no way of differentiating between them. But obviously there are differences, thus differentiation is possible. A tyrant isn't a champion of freedom for example. And so forth and so on.
Wonderfully written and translated. That faith which drives us on every day in the face of what seems to be insurmountable odds against happiness, is all that we really have to keep us sane in an insane world. The things we can control are the most important, as well as knowing what we cannot change or control. Thank you for posting this, it set my mind on fire.
Thanks Burt!
This is part of a new series, though my next piece will be continuing on the Lifting the Veil” theme, with a focus on Tavistock and the “Invisible Empire.” However, the next instalments in this theological series will be “From the Finite to the Infinite: Nicholas of Cusa’s Vision of God” and then “Homecoming: On a Mystical Journey with Rumi.”
Sounds interesting. Some reality and a break from reality is a good mix.
Lewis's dream was the defeat of evil, the triumph of good. Certainly a worthy dream, but to date, never achieved except in fantasies, such for ex. as his Space Trilogy and Narnia Chronicles.
It would be nice to see it defeated in the domain of hard fact, as opposed to that of dreams and imaginings.
That can never happen, though, unless its root is extirpated. Evil is cunning. An expert deceiver. Treacherous to the core. It assumes beauty's forms in order to tempt, tantalize, and ensnare.
It is right under everyone's nose every waking second of their lives, yet virtually never seen. Evil knows its blind prey.
Without the presence of evil how can we appreciate good? And isn't our freedom to choose it - or not - also a part of that good? And without even the possibility of evil how can we ever be free?
Both Monism and Dualism are impossible; Nondualism is the path to go. Just as it is the presence and possibility of good that makes evil so terrible so it is the presence and possibility of evil that makes good so desirable. Nothing is more evil than to see innocence - good - corrupted and besmirched; nothing is more good that to see evil overcome and redeemed. Hence good and evil are mutually interdependent.
This is not to argue on the side of evil; it is merely to give the Devil his due. Which is also a part of being good. (I doubt that the Devil ever gives God his due. Far from it: he does his level best to convince us that God is the evil one. And vice versa.)
My thinking sticks within the limits of what I can know, what I can see, feel and experience. Observable, sensible fact call it. And thus for example I never speak of "God," of which some thinker rightly said, "if he's all-loving he can't be omnipotent, if omnipotent he can't be all-loving." That was the God Christians "recognize" & assign specific character traits to. All the other ones that have abounded throughout history have their own peculiar features and attributes as assigned to them by their promoters. All such are beyond my range of experience I'm afraid.
In order to distinguish differences between things they can't all be the same. If everything were the same there would be no way of differentiating between them. But obviously there are differences, thus differentiation is possible. A tyrant isn't a champion of freedom for example. And so forth and so on.
Without this this child-like awe, which =====subtract a this?
They believed they faith alone would carry them, a=======their?
Thanks! Updates made.
Stay hungry, Tom!