- Religion and Philosophy»
- Exploring Religious Options
By the Book: Dealing with Loveless Choices the World Makes
"Friendly, I hope."
- Peter Davison's Doctor, upon being introduced to "Enlightenment" and "Persuasion".
What to do, when those around me are making loveless choices? How to reconcile bogus, detrimental, dysfunctional choices with what's true, correct, and accurate? At long last I have the answer, and it's one that's not only fair, it affirms our natural strength and grace while contesting nothing, and without losing ground.
The choice for love, which is our nature, is the choice for strength, dignity and empowerment. Our actual nature is limitless; all we could ever want has already been given us by our Creator. All we need to is accept it, like cashing a million-dollar check that has already been written and given to us.
Contrariwise the choice for lovelessness, which does not exist, is a choice for fiction, scarcity, dysfunctionality, loss of dignity, and weakness. Any premise or choice based on it is intrinsically untenable, because it is a choice at variance with the metaphysical fundaments upon which all of Creation has been based when the Creator set it into motion. As a meaningless and useless choice, the choice itself is fictional; this has already been covered. It is a testament to the grace and love of our Creator that we have been given the strength to defy the entirety of Creation, to form and manifest these fictional choices tangibly in our lives. But since the choice isn't real, neither are the results. They manifest in an artificial bubble, a house of cards in which we choose to live in order to experience these unreal contexts. That's Spacetime and Causality in a nutshell for you, actually. And like nested Russian dolls, we can nest lovelessness within lovelessness within lovelessness, choosing increasing levels of fiction for ourselves. All it requires is the choice to deprioritize what has been established Fact, given us by our Creator, and to choose something else in its place. A golden calf, essentially.
But fictions are not real. They are intrinsically unsatisfying and unworthy of us, because they do not appeal to our actual nature as Divine beings. This is the unsatisfying situation that's alluded to when someone is said to be "living a lie". And the dissatisfaction increases the more our choices are at variance with the Divine truth. We have the ability to reject everything, the perfectly and totally satisfying experience of the Eternal, in exchange for quite literally nothing; an emptiness of manifested meaninglessness. A loveless choice is unsatisfying, and satisfaction can be regained at any time by relinquishing the choice for what does not exist, and by choosing what does. Like some kind of cosmic fix-it ticket. By choosing the illusion of lovelessness, we can choose the illusion of suffering for ourselves. We can even increase it, by heaping loveless illusion upon loveless illusion. But we cannot escape the results of our own choices without relinquishing them. Far from being dangerous, this is instead an ode to our strength and power, given us by our Creator. That gift derives from the complete and total love the Divine has for us. We're free to reject it, but that necessarily involves rejecting our strength.
"Did you know that more murders are committed at 92 degrees Farenheit than any other temperature? I read an article once. Lower temperatures, people are easygoing. Over 92, it's too hot to move. But just ninety-two, people get irritable!"
- Siouxsie & The Banshees, "92 Degrees"
The more we choose the Divine, the limitless Love that exists in the Eternal, the more we choose to accept our own strength. We get closer to our Maker, and to the source of our own power. When we choose to move away from the Divine and subsist at the edge of shadow, it is our strength that allows us to do so. But as we drift away from the source of our strength, we find it waning. We have have used our strength to create the illusion of a lack of strength in ourselves. As we continue to distance ourselves from it, our manifest strength diminishes, as we have willed it to do, until we find we can no longer maintain the illusion of weakness. We must either relinquish that illusion, or go back to the Divine, the source of our strength, to get more strength to sustain it. If we accept Creation as the Divine has made it fully, we are no longer choosing the illusion of lovelessness. And if we reject it enough, we can no longer maintain the illusion. We can therefore only choose lovelessness to a certain extent. We cannot choose it totally, because that would require a total rejection of our true natures, and that is impossible. Deny that you need to breathe, and you would suffocate. In reality, though, our autonomic system overrides our choice and forces us to breathe involuntarily out of a sense of self-preservation.
And like people holding our breaths, once we choose to reject the Divine Love that is our strength, we have pulled the plug on our own power and are left to rely on our own energy reserves only. Like a rechargable battery, or the food reserves on a weekend camping expedition. Or a rich kid defying their parents, running away, and then attempting to live solely on their allowance. Eventually, it will run out. Budgetting the reserves would prolong the experience, but as the world situation demonstrates that is not what's happening here. Every moment that passes, people heap a new loveless choice upon their preexisting loveless choices, by their prioritization. They seldom go back and re-evaluate their own choices and correct previous errors. They more often make fresh loveless choices, by the same agenda by which they had chosen their old ones. It's revolving debt; the national debt the United States maintains and increases with each passing moment, complete with compound interest, until they are recognized by all as being manifestly insolvent. When loveless errors are corrected (and this is rare), it is on a piecemeal basis and the errors are never totally resolved and atoned for. It just gets worse and worse, when it comes to the bottom line... unless you happen to be the creditor to whom the debt is owed.
To reject such an unreal choice on the part of others would be to deny their own grace, dignity, and strength. That is hardly a choice I want to make, because it is antithical to my nature as Created. But to choose it would be to accept for myself that which is not so, and turn my back on the Divine. This too would be antithical. The paradox between choosing Divine Fact, while encountering fiction all around me, has been difficult to reconcile, and has perplexed me for years. Likewise, how to choose Justice in such a situation, while not letting Mercy and Grace suffer for it. This daunting paradox seemed irreconcilable to me... until now.
It is possible to affirm the strength and dignity of others, to choose in favor of their competency and ability to make their own choices, without sharing those choices. When someone chooses lovelessly, it is possible to remember their true nature (Divine Love), while acknowledging their temporary, illusory choice for the unreal. When someone's behavior exhibits the statement, "I'm breaking the law!", the functional response is not, "No! You can't! I forbid it!", but rather, "Yes. Certainly. You are." and then promptly have them arrested, and testify to that effect. Support them, and even support their illusory, unreal choice to defy the whole of Creation. After all, it's a choice made quite intentionally, and would you really want to affirm by your own actions that they are incompetent? So long as you do not partake of their choice, support them in it. Encourage them in it, even, if they're determined to make it. They know it for what it is. It's not like people haven't been told; I've made sure of that. If someone whom you know to be mentally competent seeks to be regarded as non compos mentis, the obvious (and erroneous) choice would be to oppose their choice. But why would you? Because you know them to be competent? If they're of sound mind, they can certainly make their own choices. And if they're not, then they should of course be regarded as non compos mentis. Either way, as soon as someone seeks, by their words or their actions, to be treated as less-empowered, they should be accomodated with all due haste. Just so long as one keeps in mind (as best one can) that the disempowerment, the incompetence, is not and could never be truly real.
This, of course, is the lynchpin, the keystone, upon which this whole global problem is founded. An entire world, throughout the timeline, determined to wear the guise of drooling incompetent idiocy. "We're all dysfunctional, mentally incompetent, and incapable of making anything satisfactory, meaningful, wholely loving, or worthwhile!" Yes, indeed. I support them in that, and wish them every success in that endeavor, knowing that a trip into unsatisfying fiction is one which is taken on a very finite leash. It's a bunjee jump, really; sooner or later the elastic goes taut and pulls them back. One cannot successfully arm-wrestle God, particularly when one has been fasting for months and is reduced to a shrunken, anemic, 98 pound weakling. Great stuff; it's almost slapstick.
One more point to make here, and then I'm off. If that had been the whole fiction, there never would have been any difficulty. People acting wretchedly, as candidates for, alternately, Bedlam or Versailles, would have been no problem whatsoever. If people want to break out of orbiting 'round the Sun and head onto a trajectory that takes them out into the frigid, inky darkness of empty space, terrific. But that's only been half the fictional context, hasn't it. The rest of it's been the farcical premise that one can dissociate from the Divine, from dignity, grace, and strength, and yet somehow also retain the strength to successfully encroach upon something in greater alignment with that strength. That they can somehow be outlaws, outside the realm of lawful authority, and yet also retain that authority. That one can reject their own strength, and yet somehow still have it. That they can be, of their own competent choice, mentally incompetent, and yet still retain a position of great responsibility and authority. Nuh-uh! Other than Homer Simpson and George W. Bush, nobody with feigned incompetence achieves any authority and responsibility - nobody in their right minds would give it to them, or let them keep it. Not unless one wants nuclear power plant meltdowns and international attrocities. And this isn't a democracy we're talking about; it's the fundamental metaphysical structure of Creation, perfectly formed by a perfect Divine Creator. You'll notice that the Divine doesn't make service calls - like the Maytag Repairman, there isn't any need. When something goes wrong in Creation, it's necessarily user error.
So I'm choosing Divine fact, and affirming my competency, grace, dignity and strength (and that of everyone else, while encouraging their reckless and illusory choices). The rest of the world (everyone, varying to a greater or a lesser extent from individual to individual) is and has been rejecting their strength. And the assertion is that they can all choose problems, and somehow foist them all onto me like some kind of scapegoat. Our choices come back to us, not those of others. Evidence to the contrary is just another loveless lie to be added to the pile. To believe otherwise is to defy a perfect system made by a perfect Creator. They allege that they can create a fictional context in which they are weak enough to cause problems, and yet somehow remain strong enough to foist them upon me. Those are mutually-exclusive propositions, naturally. The solution there is to affirm their illusory choice to encroach upon everything I value and hold dear, without having the strength to enforce it (beyond the fraudulent pile of evidence Spacetime has been harassing me with). The implied, unspoken assertion is that, "We're going to deprive you of any and all authority and worthwhile life-experiences. You have no place on Earth to call your own, nothing that isn't subject to deterioration, nothing you enjoy that will not be distorted into a useless and unsatisfying mockery of all you enjoy, and no social relationship we will not destroy and corrupt". And again, the correct response is to agree. Encourage, even. "Yes, this is the illusory context into which you choose to live, for now. You made that bed, you live in that choice. In order to inflict your choice on me against the strength of my choices, you would have to be more in alignment with your own strength that I am of mine, and of course, your own choices preclude that. And far be it from me to do anything that would withdraw my support from your choices; you have my full support in this suicide mission, within the bounds of ethics and good taste." We make choices that define our own realities. We do not make choices that define the realities of others against their wills, unless they don't know any better (and if they don't, that just makes such a choice even more loveless, heinous, evil, fictional, and weakening). I know my rights as given by our Creator, and know myself to be outside the venue and jurisdiction of these extremely loveless choices and their effects. Spacetime has yet to catch up with that fact, but the fiction of Spacetime is the least of my worries. It'll have to depict Divine fact sooner or later, and I'm disinterested in investing in the belief that it won't. In the meantime, I can continue to affirm the true nature of the Divine, of myself, and of my brothers, while also supporting, encouraging, and metaphysically subsidizing their loveless masquerade. (Always one for a party, me.) I've got plenty of encouragment to share, what I give out comes back to me anyway (sort of like a spiritual tax write-off), and I know better than to think that this stuff can encroach against me (since the tail doesn't wag the dog). I have plenty of encouragement for my brothers, even in this choice.
The persuasion will come about as the natural result of their quite intentional choices.
[Note: While most of the basis is sound and increases a basic understanding, this information has since become somewhat dated as I increase my own understanding of Love and the nature of Creation. To testify for someone else's Choice for lovelessness is to reinforce what is unreal. The Choice people make for lovelessness, something that doesn't truly exist, is itself an illusion, and reinforcing it by testifying to it is still an investment of Choice to some extent in their Choice for lovelessness. This is to be avoided. A better approach would be to affirm that, in truth, no such Choice was ever made on their part. Bestow your blessing and Love upon your brother, by reaffirming by your conscious Choice and recognition that they aren't truly making loveless Choices - the Divine does not make jerks - and Love them anyway. Realize that their Choices as they are currently manifest appear to be for lovelessness, and that this perception on your part is at least as much your fault as it is theirs. Then, with this realization soundly in mind, feel free to outwardly approach the situation in a way that is fair to both of you, since the manifestation is only an illusion anyway. But do keep in mind that the point of all this is to grow into an ever-increasing recognition of Love that will dispel unreal states of lovelessness, and that this is not done by acting in two different ways, one spiritual, inwardly, and the other based on illusion, in your outward choices. By acting in accordance with Love in all things, you can avoid investing your Choices in the belief that there was ever a split between the Eternal Love of Creation, and a world that was made from lovelessness. This whole physical existence was made through lovelessness, and reinforcing that using that context and its illusiory nature as a justification for making more loveless Choices, is only perpetuating the problem.]