In the essay Good and Bad, Right and Wrong, Smile and Frown, I put forth the notion of relative "Good" and Relative "Bad" as elements of existence that shape human perception. Most of what is theorized in that essay hinges upon one vital assumption: that humans value life.

In the essay Imagine a Reason to Believe, I put forth the notion that unbridled imagination can lead to delusions and insanity that could produce deadly consequences. Again, much of what is theorized in that essay hinges upon one vital assumption: that humans value life.

In the essay The Totality of Reality, I put forth the notion that a reality that is thought to be an illusion could also lead to deadly consequences. Again, much of what is theorized in that essay hinges upon one vital assumption: that humans value life.

Conversely... because I like to examine both sides of any issue...

In the essay Verse 82, I put forth the notion that something-ness and nothing-ness are both limitations to enlightenment.

In the essay Behold The Absentia! I put forth the notion that paradox is the Ultimate Cosmic Force behind any universe, and as such is necessarily detached from that universe.

In the essay The Three Unities I put forth the notion that there is more than one form of unity, and that transcendence to Absentia is a three step process of detaching from our human form and conscious minds.

In the essay An Alchemistic Recipe I put forth a slight variation of the popular alchemistic notion of stripping away our human form to achieve a terrestrial form of enlightenment.

In the essay Reincarnation I agree with the popular notion that reincarnation is a cycle of life and death that is detached from the Ultimate Cosmic Force of Absentia, and that to achieve true enlightenment means to let go of everything human - life, death and everything in between.

On a human level, letting go of everything human sounds suicidal. For most people, that tends to go against every fiber of our being. On the other hand... many of life's biggest questions seem most answerable when we eliminate our value for life from the equation! If we believe that there are no consequences for anything that happens in life, we can do anything... including things that might normally be considered evil. By eliminating evil, we can accept anything... including things that might normally be considered deadly. When things in life are seen to be completely inconsequential, anything is possible! When anything is possible, answers to life's questions are easy to come by.

Thus it is that so many spiritual philosophies tend to vilify our human form and conscious minds, in favor of the promise of enlightenment that is held within the concept of transcendence to some kind of detached realm of unity that is supposedly Divine. But whereas many spiritual philosophies describe and illustrate Divine Unity as some kind of paradise with an end to all conflict, the logical contingencies of such a state do not necessarily lead to something our mortal minds would equate with happiness. Nothing in life happens without duality. Thus, the absence of duality, logically, means the absence of all expressions of any kind - including happiness. This leads to a dilemma, as we mortal humans wrestle with the idea of Divine Unity not being as much of a paradise as advertised, vs. dealing with the dualistic nature of a human existence filled with questions rooted in wants and needs, good and bad, true and false, illusion and reality, happiness and sadness, sanity and insanity.

-----

The Bias of Spiritual Philosophies

Are things like good and bad a learned response? Are the smiles and frowns mentioned in the essay Good and Bad, Right and Wrong, Smile and Frown an evolutionary mistake, that has led us away from the utopia of Unity and Oneness where, presumably, there are NO smiles and NO frowns? In the pursuit of utopia, should we eliminate smiles and frowns from our lives, along with the good and bad feelings (like love and hate, or happiness and sadness) that they point to? Some spiritual philosophies suggest that we do. Some spiritual philosophies see every smile or frown, and the subsequent establishment of likes and dislikes that commonly accompany them, as the source of life's misery. So, inasmuch as many view the natural born instincts of most humans as the source of all misery, I can understand why some feel compelled to drive people away from any acknowledgement of such things, and shepherd them toward the utopian simplicity of unity. But are the smiles and frowns of humans really the source of all misery?

In my opinion, spiritual philosophies that encourage people to abandon the physical world in pursuit of spirituality are all too often revealing a bias. In presenting their philosophy, most of them assume that the audience they are addressing is full of miserable wretched people, wrapped up in physicality, materialism, and ego. They assume that a huge contingent of the people they are talking to are more or less spiritually bankrupt, and are currently filling their spiritual void with possessions, money, superficial appearances and external validation. They assume that a huge contingent are greedy, overambitious, over achieving, Type A, workaholics with no time on their clock to consider the utopian unity of oneness. They make an even grander assumption that as soon as people discriminate between likes and dislikes, that those likes and dislikes will inevitably become addictions and aversions, that will inevitably lead to bias and bigotry, or disappointments and misery, and that all such things need to be abandoned at ALL levels of life - like telling an alcoholic to never touch another drink ever again.

The pursuit of spiritual enlightenment should NOT be so similar or analogous to that of a criminal seeking forgiveness, or an alcoholic pursuing sobriety. ----- Manifest existence is NOT a disease in need of a cure.

Is this abandonment of human nature really the best advice? Possibly... for those living a life out of balance, in unhealthy extremes. But... personally, I don't see passion and enthusiasm as such a crime, as many of these spiritual philosophies seem to. Such passions may not lead to enlightenment, but they don't necessarily lead to misery either. Passions and enthusiasms don't HAVE to lead to addictions and misery. That, I think, is a falsely founded assumption, based on a characteristically low opinion of humanity, being expressed by people who themselves have more than likely shown vulnerability toward addiction and low self esteem (see the essay Consider The Source elsewhere on this site). And while these people might easily convince detached observers of humanity to share their low opinion of human nature, I don't believe that such a perspective should play such a pivotal role in the design of a wisdom system. Not everyone has an addictive personality. Thus, I think that, IF one cultivates an awareness of the complete dynamic between the material, ethereal and spiritual, and has the discipline and self control to stay on the road, and not go careening off into undesirable, unhealthy extremes - like those prone to addiction - that passion, enthusiasm, and dare I say it... even striving can be beneficial to the evolution of humankind. Unfortunately, within imperfect societies, filled with imperfect souls, many don't have the discipline to stay on the road, and do careen off into unhealthy extremes, and so spiritual philosophies that try to get people to COMPLETELY abandon these things flourish.

Is the majority of humanity addictive? Should the philosophies of the addictive be thrust upon those who are not?

-----

The Biggest Mistake of Life

As implied in the comments above about the denial of consequences in life, if we eliminate all sense of good and bad from our minds, we effectively eliminate all sense of right and wrong as well. When we do that, anything goes. So why not release all those rapists, pedophiles and murderers from prison, they haven't done anything bad or wrong, because there is no such thing as bad and wrong. In the eyes of those who advocate the abandonment of all sense of good and bad, everything should just be stuff happening with no moral judgment put upon it at all by anyone. No good or bad... I'm not sure I want to live in a world where right and wrong, and good and bad are abandoned.

On the other hand... if we are to believe the spiritual philosophies that vilify duality and our human form, and advocate a lawless world devoid of all sense of good and bad where anything goes, then we would have to say - from that point of view - the biggest mistake in life is to value life! Clearly, to those seeking enlightenment through the abandonment of human nature, our human nature presents a problem to our very existence! Thus, through these eyes, we can see how it is only when we acknowledge the concept of consequences upon our life that our theories of life become unresolveable conundrums. Thereby demonstrating how any theory that limits itself by regarding the preservation of life as an important component of that theory will fail to accurately describe life! Thus... the biggest mistake we make in life, is to actually care about the consequences of anything! The biggest mistake we make in life is to bother... as if anything matters. From this perspective, our motto in life should not be a motto like the Vulcan one uttered by Mr. Spock from the TV show Star Trek "Live long and prosper" it should be something more along the lines of "Live, die, whatever... I don't care, it doesn't matter." Is this truly a wise state of consciousness? Is this really what every human should be saying to every other human? Would all of humanity be better off if everyone truly lived with this motto as their guide?

Something is going on here with regards to the liberating effects of devaluing life and thereby eliminating all notions of consequence. At the same time... there is something to the human aspects of life that needs to be acknowledged. When we acknowledge human life as valuable, good and bad, true and false, illusion and reality become important. When we devalue human life and convince ourselves that nothing in life matters, good and bad, true and false, illusion and reality loose all significance. Why?

Some philosophies suggest that reincarnation is a kind of punishment for not getting enlightenment right, and being sent back to try again. Some also suggest that someone who has led a "bad" life risks being reincarnated as a "lower being" like an animal. Animals struggle to live, probably more so than most humans. When a crocodile closes its jaws around the neck of a zebra drinking out of a river, the zebra struggles to get away and stay alive. In this way, because they value their life enough to struggle to stay alive, one could argue that animals are truly unenlightened "lower" beings. In fact, the way in which some cultures use animals as "Spirit Guides" seems like a mistake, when animals are viewed in this "lower being" way. Is it a mistake for a zebra to value life? Is it a mistake for humans to value life? Is the "fight or flight syndrome" an evolutionary mistake that we humans should consider unevolved, and beneath us? When something that promises to end our life approaches, should we just lay down and die? Or are our life preserving instincts inherently "good?"

-----

I Robot

Within the Unity of Oneness, Nothingness and Absentia (see The Three Unities elsewhere on this site) there are no rules... because there are no conflicts between dualities like wants and needs, or good and bad, or true and false etc. In the world of physical forms, and conscious minds existing with other physical forms and conscious minds, there are conflicts between dualities like wants and needs, or good and bad, or true and false etc. It is the need to untangle the knots of conflict that cause relative value to be assigned to the various variables of good and bad, and true and false etc. If we accept some of the more popular notions of reincarnation, then transcendence to the Unity of Nothingness leads right back to the Duality of Everythingness. So a clear understanding of the nature of both these realms would be in order, because they are BOTH inescapable. Together, the Unity of "no differentiation" and the Duality of "binary differentiation"... create a loop of reincarnation that resembles a Mobius band, where good and bad are both "fused as one" and "split as two" or both meaningless and meaningful at the same time. The force that gives the Mobius band its twist of paradox is The Absentia, the only form of Unity that gets us off the Wheel of Reincarnation. Thus, from the perspective of The Absentia, we see how the greatest good is in fact no good, and that it's bad to think that's bad! Therein lies the paradox of our dilemma.

If the ultimate determination of good and bad is contingent upon values and subsequent rules of living, it is no wonder people embrace the infinite subjectivity of good and bad, and use that as an opportunity to abandon the often repressive rules under which they might have been raised, or under which they continue to be oppressed. There is much liberation in a rule-less realm of unity where there are no conflicts. Thus, the sanctuary of unity - where all these variable concerns vanish - becomes a desired goal for many. But as pointed out in the essay Good and Bad, Right and Wrong, Smile and Frown... "Unity" is an unsustainable state... for a mortal, manifest entity or conscious mind living in a universe with other mortal, manifest entities. While at the same time, living outside of this unified state requires that these variables be dealt with in some way - either by utilizing a personal set of rules, or a public set of rules, or a little of both. We can try to live in denial and pretend that nothing in life matters, and that everything is just stuff happening. And in an uneventful life that might nearly work. But in an eventful life, full of consequences... satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the resolution of those consequences is inevitable, causing our sense of good and bad to rear its ugly head on a regular basis.

People devoted to the goal of unity, will use the infinite subjectivity of good and bad to convince people that there is no such thing as good and bad, and that to think that there is, is misguided and unenlightened. But then... the unenlightened will inevitably beg the question that logically follows, which is to ask if that is an endorsement for the abandonment of all the rules and laws that go along with our notions of good and bad. If nothing matters, then I can do whatever I want, without consequence. I can end your life along with thousands of others, and no one should ever care. But we do. Why? Is it really just because we are all unenlightened "lower" beings? Or is it because... in the world of living, mortal humans, things matter?

Nothing in life happens without duality, diversity and complexity. In the world of unity, where there is no differentiation between things, nothing matters, because nothing happens! In my opinion THIS is the "mistake" that most people make; when they try to live a life of unity (where nothing matters) within the physical and conscious realm of duality that goes with being a living, breathing human (where things do matter). When the concepts of unity are mixed together with the concepts of duality, contradictions result between incompatible world views, or reference frames of context. For example: if we apply the enlightenment of unity to the realm of duality, it would mean that there shouldn't be any satisfaction or dissatisfaction with consequences of anything... if everything is just stuff happening. We should all be as cold, indifferent and detached as a robot... for to acknowledge or register any discernible reaction of any kind to anything would be to reveal a preference of some kind, and thereby leave the realm of unity (where we are all the same), and enter the realm of duality (where one person's reaction is not necessarily the same as another's). This is the dilemma we face - the unified theory (where there is no good or bad) and the binary theory (where there is good and bad) are equally valid, depending on the state of our existence and consciousness along a Mobius-like path of realities that would appear to be somewhat incompatible to each other. With that in mind, I would suggest that... if transcendence to unity is the goal, enter that context and be as cold, indifferent, detached, non-existent, and non-manifest as possible... in other words... stop being so human! (see Verse 82 elsewhere on this site). If manifest existence is the game, enter that context and react to things... and struggle to define the many variables of good and bad, right and wrong, true and false, illusion and reality, to understand what being a good person is in this manifest, conscious life, and what a good life means... in other words... go ahead be human!

People use the infinite subjectivity of good and bad, to steer people away from dwelling on the bad. But, in a lot of ways, this is tantamount to sweeping dirt under the carpet, especially if what they are doing is replacing every bad thing with a good thing... instead of being absolutely indifferent, detached and neutral, like a robot. Most readers of tarot claim to be neutral, but when talking to them, it becomes clear that they have a tremendous bias toward soothing the psyche of their client, by putting a good spin on every bad thing that comes up, and steering the client away from any and all bad thoughts (see Mitigate-the-Bad vs. A Blind Oracle elsewhere on this site).

Thus it is that these hypocritical ways project a bias rooted in the denial of one thing over another. These people, consciously or unconsciously... willingly or mistakenly, equate the idea of "Nothing matters" with "It's all good" instead of equating it with "It's all neutral." With that mindset in place, it is not hard to see how they are able to lead themselves into thinking that by presenting only one way of thinking, they are in fact being neutral. But if what they are presenting is a single minded bias toward "good" they are not being neutral at all. To be truly neutral they should be as cold and indifferent as a robot. A robot does not care about soothing the psyche of anyone, a robot doesn't care about hurting someone's feelings. Thus... I would say... if the client of a reading thinks that the reader cares whether they live or die, that reader is not doing their job!

Lots and lots of people look to the tarot for healing and reassurance, what they want from tarot is a kind of cosmic "pat on the back" with an "Ah, there, there, everything will be alright" - a divinely inspired "shoulder to lean on." And because a significant part of what any device does is reflect back to us who we are, that's what they see when they look at tarot - they find in it what they want to find. Personally, I think it's wonderful to be so stuck in such a positive life-affirming view of existence. But, at the same time, I think it is less than "true" to project that bias onto things like a tarot deck, that might have been created by someone with no such bias... or, onto other things that might be devoted directly to negating life, either naturally or maliciously.

In the study being presented on this site, it is considered human to be asymmetrical. And it is considered divine to be symmetrical. Some postulate the divine to be more "true." If so, then balance, whether as a dualistic appreciation life and death, or as something infinitely neutral, would be more "true" than any imbalance of human perception. Thus, to view everything as life-affirming would be imbalanced, with a bias toward life. It is a human frailty to fall into such an asymmetrical trap. A robot who does not have such human frailties, would be less likely to make such a crucial mistake.

-----

The Paradox in the Lotus Mandala

Here is a mandala you can use to meditate on the idea of death being of no consequence to humans. In this mandala skulls and bones of death threaten the physical form of the lotus... that The Divine Unity uses to clothe itself in our mortal world. Within the lotus, there are five fourfold models of existence. Each model has a center of unity. The blob connecting the five models symbolizes how all centers of manifestation transcend to the same place - Oneness. The stylized Mobius band in the center of the blob symbolizes how all unities eventually transcend to the paradoxical state of Absentia. Thus we see how the loss of one fourfold model of existence is inconsequential to the concept of unity that it once contained. Unity - or Cosmic Consciousness - persists despite the loss of any individual manifest being. Like the literal clothes we wear, life is cheap, and totally expendable... that is... from the perspective, or context, of The Divine Unity and its desire to be clothed with manifest existence.

Some would have us believe that it is a mistake to value life, and that we should view Life, and any identity of Self within Life, only from the vantage point of the "One True Reality" of ineffableness, which would then enable us to view any form of identity of Self as an illusion whose fate is inconsequential. Like the literal clothes we wear, life is cheap and totally expendable. That is... from the perspective of The Divine. Like soldiers on a battlefield, we live and die for the sake of The Divine. The Divine has no capacity whatsoever to care one way or another about our fate. It just is...or isn't, so that we are. In this mandala, the Self is like an individual head of a many headed Hydra - each head unique and able to encounter other heads as tangible entities that exists externally to each other, but always attached to a single body that represents the unerlying unity of The Divine... or, the nothingness the precedes the central mobius-like paradox of The Divine, i.e. what this study of tarot and cosmology is calling The Absentia.

On a human level, the beauty of the lotus flower symbolizes The Gift of Life and how we are to cherish it, nurture it, protect it and help it to live as long as possible. Its eventual death may not matter to the persistent unity that it clothes, but it would be my theory that: life, once begotten, is meant to live, for as long as humanly possible... as an expression of universal forces. It would be my theory that we mortals are in fact only GUESSING that the demise of each manifest being does not matter to the persistent Unity of Divinity. The neutrality of Oneness, Nothingness and Absentia (the three unities) might, to some, logically lead to a lack of human emotion that would find any remorse in any loss of life, but as a completely logical, unemotional outcome, my theories state that the Universe is here because the Absentia isn't. The ultimate purpose of this logical arrangement remains a mystery to human minds (see the two locked boxes of The Absentia elsewhere on this site), but there is nothing in it to suggest that the death of an entity is not something that reincarnation is meant to rectify so that life and death as a whole remain as persistent as the Divine Unity from which they came. If The Universe is a reflection of The Absentia, the persistence of form programmed into perpetual unity would logically reflect as well into the nature of transient manifestation. So... when we are dead, hang on to death and dread life. When we are alive, hang on to life and dread death. When we transcend off this wheel to the most Divine state of Absentia, hang on to Absentia. If you can...! Can you?

-----

The Tarot Fool

Is the greatest good really no good? Is it bad to think that's is bad? I think the paradox of this dilemma will persist no matter what. But... if we are to live in denial of anything, I think it would be more healthy to live in denial of the paradox, rather than living in denial of our human nature. With that in mind I'd be inclined to say that - within the context, or reference frame, of conscious, mortal humans - the greatest good is in fact good. In other words... keep good, keep bad, and deal with them on the human level that they represent.... reincarnate as many times as necessary to understand the nature of a realm without such duality. Then... when we transcend off the wheel of reincarnation to the unity of Absentia, we can deal with a realm devoid of good and bad. But while here in this manifest human life of mortal sentient beings who tend to value the life that has been given to them... deal with good and bad as good and bad. Don't live life in denial of the human form that has been given, as if it is some kind of prison or disease.

However... if someone truly believes that our only purpose in life is to get the hell out of this God-forsaken state of manifest existence by attempting to deny our human form and instead be as unified as any manifest being can be... so that we can "fit through the door" of "God"-like "singularity" when we die, and not be reincarnated into this Hell on Earth ever again... then by all means, detach... be as indifferent and emotionally neutral as possible (see Verse 82 elsewhere on this site). Make Mr. Spock from Star Trek look like a drama queen by comparison. When another commercial jet liner full of people flies into another sky scraper, give a yawn of indifference, and go about your day... watching all the silly unenlightened humans scurrying around like ants, trying to save lives... as if it matters. Because... to someone who is blind to the ideas of good and bad, and trying to live a life that does not acknowledge anything as good or bad, it clearly shouldn't matter... because... without good and bad... it's all just stuff happening. If the baby dies in its crib of sudden infant death syndrome, just throw it out and make another one. Don't feel sad, don't mourn... that would be unenlightened. Don't even look at it as some kind of blessing in disguise - because, in a world where a person of duality is trying to be a person of unity, there is no such thing as blessings... or tragedy. In a world where we are all enlightened, unified beings of oneness, there is no good or bad... no blessings or tragedy... just stuff happening - none of which matters.

So... to be enlightened (unity)... while in a mortal state (duality)... live life like a tarot Fool. In some decks, The Fool is shown heading for, or stepping off of a cliff, to symbolize the indifference he has to any notion of consequences. He knows that nothing in life matters. Life and death are meaningless. Live, die, whatever, he doesn't care, because nothing matters. So when someone tells an enlightened tarot Fool that they have cancer and will probably die soon, they should not expect any kind words of sympathy, because that would imply some sadness for an impending loss of life. The enlightened tarot Fool will not grieve. The enlightened tarot Fool will simply say "oh well, la di da" and walk away... or give a blank stare and say nothing... like the idiot all we unenlightened humans perceive him to be.

Thus... to find the most enlightened people on Earth, look for those who the overtly emotional people of the world describe as "dead inside" - the imperturbable. These are the ones who are truly detached, neutral, dispassionate, indifferent and don't care about the outcome of anything. Those who are "dead inside" are the ones who are either the most enlightened, or have the greatest potential for achieving enlightenment of all of us. The ones who emotional people describe as "dead inside" are the ones who don't celebrate highs and don't fret over the lows. They don't sing in the choir and they don't cry at funerals (if they even go). They abstain from indulgence in life. They don't get "high" or low. They don't think with their genitals, or their heart. The ones who are "dead inside" are the ones who will say "so what" when someone tells them about the cancer that is killing them, or the drunk driving traffic accident that took the life of a loved one. Because, to The Tarot Fool, anyone who talks about the life of a loved one as "a loved one" is expressing a bias of love over hate that prevents them from being detached enough to be considered enlightened. Only someone who does not love... or hate... could be considered enlightened - for to move one tiny step off of dead center neutral is to live in the world of dualities that so many consider the root of all suffering.

-----

Beyond Love

Neither hate nor love! Only when Love and Hate are BOTH absent... or... in Absentia, does The Great Way become clear. For most people, giving up either Love or Hate is next to impossible. Some might declare giving up Hate to be doable. But to also abandon Love...? Why? Why would anyone want to do that? For many, abandoning Love might make the whole idea of enlightenment seem somewhat undesirable. Infinite neutrality of thought, action, state and emotion is not easy, for a living breathing mortal human interacting with other living breathing mortal humans in a flawed world of binary dualities. But, clearly, the only way to achieve infinite neutrality of duality is to detach from everything to an infinite degree - i.e. stop being so human! But is this really the best prescription for finding Divinity?

Clearly, to experience Divine Unity, we need to transcend beyond all human notions of wants and needs, good and bad, true and false, illusion and reality, happiness and sadness, sanity and insanity... AND love and hate. The force that gets us off the wheel of reincarnation and out of our world of duality is The Absentia. In The Absentia, there is no love, or hate. There is no black or white. The Absentia is gray. The Absentia is neutral. The Absentia is where we achieve infinite neutrality of duality. Thus... if what most people call "God," or "He whose name shall not be uttered" is The Absentia, then... God is not Good, God is not Light, God is not Love. "God" is BEYOND all that. Thus... the "Light of God" - as seen within the concepts of paradox and unity held by The Absentia - is, at best, Gray.

Thus... the Blinding White Light that many associate with "God" is probably more accurately defined as the light of LIFE. God giveth and God taketh away, with complete and utter neutrality... in absolute absentia to all of life and death. Thus... in at least one manner of thinking... it is LIFE - not God - that is Light, and DEATH - not God - that is Darkness. While... God, is in fact Gray. Even if God is considered to be both Absentia and Universe together, (as suggested in the essay The Three Unities) then... God is still more Gray than Black or White alone. Thus... Divinity is beyond Love. Divinity is beyond Hate.

God is Gray!

-----

The Clothing of a Demiurge

"God is Gray." Meaning... if abandonment of opposites leads to Divinity, then neutrality is Divine, and God is Gray. Actually... to be perfectly precise, "God" would also be beyond Gray... but to find evidence of the presence of The Absentia, looking to gray would be considered more accurate to the idea of infinite neutrality of duality that any other color. By using a color to indicate something ineffable, some might prefer that we actually declare "the gray of God" to be more accurately viewed as the gray of a Demiurge... a Demiurge, projected out of Absentia, to create what many spiritual philosophies consider to be an imperfect world of duality, in which we all live. But for those who like the idea of a Demiurge creating duality, I personally would not consider it to be one Demiurge, but many. Meaning, that each and every one of us is a Demiurge, capable of neutrality or duality, but NOT absolute Absentia. The Absentia is one step beyond - not black, white or gray.

The Absentia is one step beyond. It is ineffable. It cannot be spoken about - including right here and now, with these very words - without diluting its true nature of... absentia. Thus... the color gray becomes one of many methods of "clothing" the ineffable. To me, the things we use to "clothe" The Absentia are not so much of a Demiurge as they are cans of metaphorical paint being poured over the invisible ineffableness to metaphorically see where it is... and how it isn't... at least for the duration of any particular discussion. In this way, we "clothe" The Absentia with language, using the word Absentia. We "clothe" The Absentia with color, using the color gray. We "clothe" The Absentia with logic, using the logic of paradox (see The Point of Paradox elsewhere on this site). We "clothe" The Absentia physically, using the topographical paradox of a Mobius strip. In this particular instance, the color gray doesn't convey the notion of paradox as much as a Mobius strip or logic and language, but it comes a lot closer than the dualities of either White or Black alone... thus it is usable as something with which to "clothe" the ineffable (see the essay Behold The Absentia, elsewhere on this site).

The idea of neutral gray representing more of a Demiurge than the actual Divine "Godforce" of The Absentia itself, might make more sense to those who view The Universe as a flawed creation, and humans as flawed inhabitants of that flawed creation. And while I would agree that humans are only a close approximation or loose interpretation of an impossible ideal, I also believe that variety is the spice of life... not the downfall of life. People create the idea of a Demiurge to explain the presence of Evil in our world. The theory being that a true "God" would not be so flawed as to include Evil in the design of a universe, but a Demiurge - a figure once removed from "God"-like flawlessness - would... and did. This idea might be a comfort to those who live in fear of Evil, and work to avoid it or combat it. But the idea of Evil being a flaw, and its alternative - Goodness, Love and Light - being something better for us to strive for, only returns us to a state of duality where making "God" into something Good, Light and Compassionate expresses a bias, rooted in opposites. Turning our notions of God into something Light, Good and Compassionate might be comforting to our psyche, but it is not accurate to the idea of detached neutrality... and beyond.

So... for those who want to view all the "clothed" representations of The Absentia as a Demiurge, creating a duality that they prefer to view as flawed, I would reiterate the idea that each and every one of us is that Demiurge, living out our flawed existence in duality. I would then argue that there is no escape from this flawed existence, without going that one step beyond... to The Absentia. In The Absentia, there is NO such thing as Good, Light or Love... or... Bad, Dark or Hate. In The Universe, there is. We live in The Universe. We live within a World, within The Universe. And while I agree, our world could definitely use a lot more Love... and other life affirming things, I'm compelled to view Love and Life as only one half of a binary pair, removed from true Divinity. If we are supposed to transcend opposites, in order to experience Divinity, we must - logically - leave behind all the Love... and Hate.

Love and Hate go hand in hand. Between those hands we find the gray of God, which is the "clothing" worn by The Absentia.

Why are humans so conflicted? We love, we hate. And at the same time, we are told that we shouldn't do either? Can any one of these really be separated from the other through any kind of abandonment? Without opposites, we are nothing and nobody. Make one tiny step into duality and we become something and somebody. Nothing and nobody is better?

-----

The Intoxication of Love

When people talk about the power of Love as a core concept of Divinity, people react with enthusiasm. Like a plant turning toward the sun, we are drawn to the very idea of Love. In this way, it is typically very easy for a spiritual philosophy to attract popularity and promote acceptance of "truth" among its followers. But... a philosophy that puts extraordinary emphasis upon good, life affirming things is not balanced. Such a philosophy may become a great sanctuary for the downtrodden among us, and rejuvenate our life forces... but to consider such things as the core of Divinity seems inaccurate, due to the gross imbalance of one opposite over another.

The Goodness, Compassion and Love that many spiritual philosophies inject into their beliefs is very powerful, because Love is such a powerful emotion. Because Love is so powerful, and feels so good and right, people have very little problem accepting it as Divine. Once told - or lead to believe - that Love is Divine, they then feel as though they have been given permission to pursue Love to its utmost extreme. People like this. They like the idea of finding some absolute, unchanging, all powerful "thing" that they can know to be true, and subsequently attach themselves to with typical addictive zeal... the same addictive zeal that some of those very philosophies argue they should abandon! When an entire group of people adopt this mindset, the intoxication of Love blinds them to the logical fact that they are NOT being neutral, but are in fact expressing an extreme emotion that is part of a binary pair of emotions that are rooted in the Human nature of duality and not the Divine. Thus, Divinity rooted in duality becomes hypocritical to the stated goal of transcendence away from duality. This is how powerful our emotions can be. The lesson being, how "good" emotions can mislead us just as easily as "bad" emotions.

But... people tend to forgive the misleading ways of "good" emotions. Why? The answer is because of our inability to detach from Life and all our life preserving instincts. Thus, Divinity becomes a life preserving sanctuary, when combined with the Humanity of Love and other life preserving instincts. In this way people clearly demonstrate their inability to let go... 100% of the way, to absolute Divinity. They will typically insist on holding to the good... to life... to love. No matter what. Thus making Divinity and Love more of a weapon, to take into battle against Evil, than a transcendent state that lies beyond such battles. In this way, people who wage these battles are like animals cornered, with no way out, where they "hunker down" in Love, in the hopes of thwarting all the surrounding Hate in the world with their distorted sense of Divinity. But... In my opinion, this is not Divine. A group of people devoted to Love might do a lot of good for the world in which we live, i.e. Humanity. But, strictly speaking, I would not consider Love to be the core of Divinity.

In my opinion, extremes of any kind are usually not healthy. Whether they be extremes of Love or extremes of Hate, extremes are all too often not healthy. People who "hunker down" in Love often end up living in denial of Hate, and are emotionally devastated when their fragile beliefs come under attack. This is not healthy. Denial is not healthy. In this way, I do not see the extreme pursuit of Love, and a spiritual pursuit of Divinity as the same thing. It would be my belief that spiritual philosophies that do not make this subtle, yet vitally important, distinction are flawed. People seeking life affirming sanctuary from the turmoil of bad things and the darkness of death will typically forgive these flaws (see the essay Consider the Source elsewhere on this site). I don't. It would be my opinion that clear distinctions ought to be made between the needs of humans who value life, and those who have detached from that component of binary thinking, in pursuit of Divinity. To conflate the two is a misleading mistake... perhaps the biggest and most common mistake any of us make when it comes to our pursuit of knowledge concerning Divinity. In fact, in many ways pursuing Divinity is itself a mistake. Divinity is not really to be pursued - only acknowleged. Or... let's say pursued until acknowledged, then no longer pursued but acknowledged. Or as an ancient Zen saying puts it "Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water."

To conflate Divinity and Humanity by bending the rules, and fusing the neutrality of unity with the bias of duality, is a mistake. But there is a very good reason to perpetuate this mistake. It sells! It gives the public what it wants. And... there is a huge contingent of our world population that will insist that they get what they want, even if it means bending the rules and living in denial of the distorted outcome that results (see the essay Consider the Source elsewhere on this site). In my opinion, some of the greatest philosophers of all time have fallen into this trap. Some however don't. The Seng-Ts'an quote, mentioned above, reveals a philosophy that appears to be clear in its desire to differentiate what is Divine from what is Human. But there is another idea which that quote reveals, that is also a trap...

-----

One Hand Washes the Other... and The Other

We aspire to Divinity, but we live in Humanity. We aspire to Unity, but we live in Duality. We aspire to The Absentia, but we live in The Universe. At the same time - paradoxically - Divinity and Humanity, Unity and Duality, Absentia and Universe are all one! Thus... I would consider it misguided for anyone to abandon any one of these states for another at any time. They are interdependent in every way. To borrow a line from The Point of Paradox: "Do not bind the self to either. Bond the self to both... through paradox." Through paradox, the opposites of duality and the singularity of unity are one (see The Three Unities elsewhere on this site). Therefore... we should not conclude failure if we exhibit signs of being Human while pursuing Divinity. But we should consider it failure when we pursue one of these options to an exclusive, unhealthy extreme that attempts to completely abandon, and in the process vilify the other. This is true of the duality that exists between Divinity and Humanity, as well as the duality that exists between various aspects of Humanity itself, like Love and Hate. Do not "hunker down" in Love. Do not abandon Humanity for Divinity. Embrace the entire trinity of Love, Hate and Absentia, of Light, Dark and Gray... i.e. let one hand wash the other... and... The Other.

As the Seng-Ts'an quote states: The Great Way is only clear when Love and Hate are BOTH absent, and that to make the smallest distinction between Love and Hate is to set Heaven and Earth infinitely apart. These are wise words, but... hard for many to accept. Because... when Love and Hate are BOTH absent, the Way may be clear, but... at some cost to our sense of Humanity. Conversely, when Love and Hate are both present, we are human, but... at some cost to our sense of Divinity. Like life on a Mobius strip, we have a sense of being one sided (Divine)... and two sided (Human)... at the same time. And like life on a Mobius strip, the two are interminally unresolvable. They will perpetually coexists in endless torment to each other. Given this state of affairs, it is obvious that we will feel as trapped in Divinity, knowing that the smallest distinction will make Heaven and Earth infinitely apart, as we will in our Humanity knowing that duality separates us from the Divine. Thus... we should not bind the self to either, but bond the self to both... through paradox. To borrow another line from The Point of Paradox: "In paradox... there is no one without two, and no two without one. So... to abandon two for one is as misguided as abandoning one for two. Thus making a life lived only in the one as much of a prison as a life lived only in the two.

-----

The Core of Divinity

A group of people devoted to spreading Love across all of Humanity, is a good thing... not a bad thing. Most people would agree with that... assuming they agree that there are such things as "good" and "bad" within our world of Humanity. For those who do, Love becomes attached to the notion of Good, and in that way it becomes half of a dualism. Some, however, might think it necessary to deny and abandon all notions of "good" and "bad" in pursuit of Divinity (see Good and Bad, Right and Wrong, Smile and Frown elsewhere on this site). If The Great Way is only clear when Love and Hate are BOTH absent... or in Absentia, what is the core of Divinity? What is the core of Humanity? Can Divinity and Humanity get along? Or do we HAVE to abandon one for the other?

In addition to the topographical paradox of a Mobius strip, I think an answer to this question might be found through our observation of the optical illusion known as Neckar's Cube. A two dimensional wireframe drawing of a transparent cube that, because of its ambiguous lack of monocular visual cues, allows our minds to see either of the six sides as forward or behind the others, as seen below:

Neckar's Cube. And my own version of the same idea.

Like the Mobius strip with its two sides that are actually one, or one side that is actually two, the sides of a Neckar's cube present an interminally unresolvable duality that is in actuality a unity. Buy presenting something that can be viewed as equally valid in either of two ambiguous ways, we duplicate the conditions of Divinity and Humanity or Unity and Duality being equally valid viewpoints that are exclusive to each other. But the condition that speaks most emphatically to the dilemma at hand is how we - living, breathing, mortal humans - are not able to view both of these equally valid options at once. When we stare at a Neckar's cube, one face comes forward... for a while. Then... the other face comes forward... for a while. Then... back again. This then becomes a visual analogy for the condition of Divinity being Human and Humanity being Divine, but not both being both. To borrow yet another line from The Point of Paradox: "Be Human in Duality. Be one with Unity. Be Divine through the paradox of The Absentia.

Divinity and Humanity are two aspects of the same thing. Our human perceptions might limit how well we resolve the ambiguity between them. And we may argue to the end of time about which face is forward of the other... which one is more important at which time, or in which context. But ultimately they are the same thing. The core of Divinity is Humanity and the core of Humanity is Divinity. When attached to relative Humanity, opposites exist and Love is preferred. When detached to absolute Divinity, opposites don't exist and Love is deferred. The same could be said of Life. Ultimately, the relative and the absolute are one, and we move back and forth between them with the same fluidity as the Neckar's cube illusion. This way or that way. Doesn't matter. But again, the condition that speaks most emphatically to the dilemma at hand is how we look at the optical illusion of Neckar's cube, and only see one face come forward at a time. Thus, the optical illusion of Neckar's cube illustrates how we can only be one way at a time, even though we are always both at the same time! A subtle, yet vitally important distinction that I think it healthy to observe and acknowledge. Additionally... the way the other face eventually overtakes the other, illustrates the unsustainable nature of transcendent unity by mortal minds living in a mortal world of dualities. Thus, The Absentia becomes the only transcendent way to see neither face as forward of another.

-----

Hunker in the Bunker of Love

Devotion to Love is how a spiritual philosophy attracts proponents. It's a good way to build a church of mortal, human believers. For those attached to a world of dualities, who believe that Life is to be valued and preserved, Love can do a lot of Good. But Life, Love and Good are not transcendent - they are Human. To transcend... Life, Love and Good need to be set aside, or left behind. So... if building a church full of living, breathing, mortal humans is the goal, advertise Love. But... if transcendence to the Divine is the goal, advertise infinitely detached neutrality of action, thought, state and emotion. For those who want to do good for Humanity, do good. For those who are interested in Divinity, be a detached, neutral, unemotional, indifferent, entity, without hate, or Love for anyone. For those who think they are capable of being absolutely neutral in every way, without any hate or love for anyone, try reading the essay Be Gray Every Day, elsewhere on this site. For those who think they might want to express Love and Goodness in life preserving ways, for the good of Humanity, try reading the essay Good and Bad, Right and Wrong, Smile and Frown elsewhere on this site.

People want to connect to the Divine. They also like to think that they are good. So it is natural for them to think that by connecting to something that is supposedly larger than themself (Divinity), that they will become empowered in some way in their goodness (Humanity). Once that feeling of empowerment is found, they feel like using it toward their expressions of goodness. So it is natural for them to associate, and ultimately conflate, the power of their own good with the alleged power of Divinity. But, I believe that such a perspective is not accurate to the way things actually are. Goodness is good... for promoting and preserving Life. But Life is only half of a duality. Divinity, according to quite a few definitions put forth by quite a few spiritual philosophies, is beyond duality. It is not good... or bad. In this way, Divinity and Humanity are mutually exclusive expressions of the same thing! Like the mutually exclusive "one sided" and "two sided" nature of a Mobius strip... untwist the twisted, and we twist the untwisted. That is what makes this all so perplexing.

If a church of Love is what is desired an anthropomorphized figure could even be invented - through the mythology of the culture - to embody the Light and Life of Humanity in ways that ordinary people could use to relate to abstract concepts. For those inclined toward the worship of icons, they could idolize this "person." In this way, they could view this "person" as a gateway to Divinity (see "The Great Regress" within the essay Be Gray Every Day elsewhere on this site). But even the most loving, compassionate "person" would never be 100% Divine. As the embodiment of Light and Love, they would only be 50% Divine. In other words, they would not be considered "God" ... they would have to be considered something derivative of "God"... like... oh, I dunno... maybe, a Son.

-----

The Holy Grail of Gray Mandala

Divinity and Humanity are mutually exclusive expressions of the same thing. The Neckar's cube illusion is a good way of illustrating that point. Here is a mandala with another optical illusion at its center that can also be used to illustrate the idea of Humanity and Divinity being interdependent in a mutually exclusive way. Does the circle in the center enclose two faces looking at each other, or a goblet?

Don't focus on opposites. Don't abandon opposites. USE the opposites of Humanity to find Divinity. Divinity and Humanity are mutually exclusive expressions of the same thing! Be one while being both. This mandala is a variation on the Wreath mandala/diagram that adorns the front page of this site and the essay Why Only Nine, and the White, Black, Gray mandala seen in the essay Be Gray Every Day.

This mandala teaches us a very important lesson. The lesson hear is to not run away from our problems! This is illustrated by the way opposites of black and white combine to create a third image of a Grail between. By illustrating the interdependence of black, white and gray... or the duality of Humanity and the unity of Divinity, we learn that abandonment of opposites does not lead to Divinity any more than focusing on opposites. We learn that the trick to finding the elusive "Grail" of Divinity is in USING opposites to "see" the infinite neutrality of duality which leads directly to Divinity.

Lots of philosophies argue for the abandonment of opposites and duality in favor of some promise that we will find something better within the neutrality of unity. To me, this kind of abandonment for something better sounds like a philosophy invented by someone inclined to run from their problems in search of a womb to crawl back into (see the essay Consider the Source and Verse 82, elsewhere on this site). This suspicion often seems confirmed when the philosophy they end up with doesn't really abandon opposites at all, but merely "hunkers down" in love, compassion and goodness - a preferred realm of duality where Light, Love and Goodness become walls of defense against the Dark, Hate and Badness around them. In this way, the Love they promulgate often seems less than pure, honest or real. This mandala suggests that we do something different, and accept opposites as a tool. It suggests that we deal with the dualities of Humanity, rather than choose up sides, or run from them both as if they were both evil. It suggests that we embrace them both... use them both... and master them both... for the purpose of finding a kind of unity that expresses a full and complete spectrum of possibilities between Humanity and Divinity.

Like the sensitive mechanisms that exist within our inner ear, our sense of opposites should not be denied or destroyed, lest we comletely loose our balance and fall. Thus, to me, this denial of opposites is the real "fall of man." Our inability to DEAL with the bad as well as the good, and the declared objective of so many philosophies to eliminate bad, like a protective parent trying to shelter a child, is the real "fall of man." If... into each one's life no rain should ever fall, crops dry up!

Thus it is, that in this Holy Grail of Gray mandala, the elusive "Grail" of Divinity cannot BE found, without the use of opposites. Just like the Mobius band, that is in fact a one sided piece of paper that could not happen, without the two sided piece of paper that creates it (read the book All Things Are Numbers found elsewhere on this site). People who focus too much on one opposite in fear or revulsion of the other - like those who "hunker down" in love... will not see the "Grail," they will only see the light face, while living in denial and/or fear of the dark face. Those who abandon both opposites as evil will not see it, their view will be filled with nothing but gray. Only those who master opposites and neutrality together will see it. Then... and ONLY then, the lines of magnetic, transcendent, radiance will flow through that "Grail" like an endless fountain of Divinity. Each one of us is that Grail - another reason so few ever find it! Only when the universe flows through us in this exact way are we ever truly Divine in our Human skin... in my opinion...!

-----

EXTRA CREDIT

For more on the Human perceptions of Good, read the essay Good and Bad, Right and Wrong, Smile and Frown. For more on the idea of being infinitely detached in neutrality of action, thought, state and emotion, read the essay Be Gray Every Day.

If you think that things in life matter, read the first three essays mentioned at the beginning of this essay. If you don't think anything in life matters, read the last five essays mentioned at the beginning of this essay. If you think that a marriage of these two seemingly incompatible perspectives is what is needed, read everything on this site! If the idea of "God" being gray sounds interesting, continue on to the essay entitled Be Gray Every Day.