Replies

That’s a very interesting post, it may be interesting to read more elaboration (as I may be missing something) but I must take issue with the following:

“(That is why the ‘apple’ was the apple of the knowledge of good and evil, or the attachment to good and evil. Desire for ‘good’ will lead to suffering. Desire for ‘bad’ will lead to suffering.)

The lily neither spins nor toils. (no attachment to good, no attachment to bad.) In this state, it manifests beauty, or light. Possessing no grasped nature, it is only what it is. Desire the lily, and you will suffer.”

Two things: I think we can all agree that suffering is bad.

Assuming that is an agreeable axiom, then I object to the following assertion:

Desire for good will lead to suffering. Desire for bad will lead to suffering.

What these two statements clearly force, is that therefore all desire is bad. (Again, assuming we can and do agree suffering is bad)

But this notion (that all desire is bad) is precisely not Father’s point/claim above. Indeed if I may expound briefly, all desire is a desire for Christ. Even disordered desires. This is because our desires are never fully satisfied, and thus, in an objective way, point to (indeed require) Christ as their fulfillment.

So in this way, desire itself isn’t “bad”. No matter what desire you’re talking about. It only becomes bad when (as you correctly say) we “sin” (or miss the mark) with them. And what is the mark?

Again, their only solution: Jesus Christ.

What you have described in your post does not seem like Christianity (at least not Catholic Christianity), it seems like Buddhism. Buddhists also claim all desire is bad. Especially a desire for beautiful things like the example you used with the lily.

You seem to be advocating a detachment from all things created which is again not Father’s point above. Indeed all things are good (in the Christian religion) precisely because they were created by God. Thus as Father says, it’s not “bad” to have an attachment to things, only a disordered attachment is destructive.

Hi -

The attachment to good or bad being the same thing.

The desire for good and bad being the same thing.

It’s not that ‘bad’ isn’t ‘bad’. It’s that attachment to “not bad” gives rise to suffering.

It’s the ‘desire’ and the ‘attachment’ that cause suffering. Bad in itself may cause the experience of pain. Good in itself may cause the experience of joy.

Attachment to either. Desire for either. This is the realm of The World, not Heaven. In Heaven, there is no good or bad, no either. The key words, then, are ‘desire’ and ‘attachment’. Normally we think the key words are ‘good’ and ‘bad’ ... or ‘good’ and ‘evil’.

It sounds like semantic tricks, and it sounds a little like Buddhism, but Buddhism is totally misinterpreted anyway.

But it’s not. The trap that keeps us in The World is locating our souls within a time bound, space bound architecture.

I promise I’m not playing semantic tricks - I’m very sincere.

What all this points to - and it can only point - is beyond concepts, words anyway. I believe that’s why (I think) even Judeo-Christian traditions at times have held that to even speak His name is in itself to miss the mark.

Suffering is itself not bad. The experience of it is unpleasant, and we may not want it. But in itself it is not bad. It says “Wake Up! You are going in the wrong direction.” Without it, the starving person would not eat, the spiritually corrupt person would not change, even the good man would not know that The World is not where peace is to be found.

This whole conversation takes a life time. I take no issue with your last paragraphs ... I agree with them in fact in the context you’re using the words.

This spiritual stuff ... very difficult to use words ... because from above, my property is ‘down’ ... it is also ‘down’ from a man in China. But China is down from me, and I am ‘down’ from China.

So all those sentences are true, all the words are true, yet they are totally contradictory. Words are in the realm of The World, ultimately can never be trusted because they change based on where one is standing. So yeah ...

“Again, their is only solution: Jesus Christ.”

Yes, but not ultimately those words, rather, what those words point to, which is nameless.

I’m going to shut up now. I don’t disagree with a single word in the Bible (I disagree with many interpretations of the Bible), but I know I’m skating on thin ice to discuss it these ways. Just food for thought - for chewing or spitting out if it tastes bad. And not a word of it is to veer from traditional teaching. I’m no Saint, but I care about these things deeply.

“Two things: I think we can all agree that suffering is bad.”

Suffering can be penance for our sins.

Suffering can temper our steel.

Suffering, including the humiliation of illness, can open our minds to new ways of seeing things.

The Earth is a device put here to give us the opportunity to become worthy to spend eternity with God.

Without suffering, the device does not function.

Unless bad things can happen to good people for no apparent reason, the device does not function.

I am convinced that God has an entirely different perspective on suffering, and even death, than do we mortals.