SAKELIS PANOS

What is the meaning of “bad”? At the end, if it was made by… the guy from high above, why is it bad?

I was always sure about something, but I could not explain it. You may ask me, can you explain it now? Well… not sure, but I think what I am about to share could make some sense.

So, since God made this world, where the f… was found all the evil that filled it? On the other hand, if someone else created the world, didn’t God make that creator as well?

Wait a minute, if Lucifer made the world and Lucifer – the first angel, always according to the scriptures – was made by God (this is undisputed), one thing is for sure, either he made a mistake in the execution of the plans commissioned by Him, or he followed the commands just fine and this is the correct plan of the creation.

Does it make any sense to you? It doesn’t to me. I am afraid that a straight approach doesn’t lead anywhere unless we want to enter complicated and misguided interpretations that end up in the well-known anecdote “What an amazing suit the cripple is wearing!”

So let’s look at it from another point of view and forget for a while the dipole good-evil. We have: male-female, positive-negative, up-down, etc. Their analogy is not, of course, from one hand male, positive, up and from the other feminine, negative, down! Many more elements must be applied for a ratio to be correct. But what we can say is that the dipoles we mentioned are opposite and not absorbent. Absonant ideas are the male and the non-male, the female and the non-female, etc.

The opposites, if combined, produce a third condition that will not be either the one or the other. The absonant accomplishes nothing; the term that is produced is not fertile. All these stands, of course, in a first approach. In the animal kingdom, for example, if a horse mates with a donkey (a horse with a non-horse), we will have the birth of a mullet that is naturally sterile.

Now for an example of human relationships: If a woman likes the sea and the man likes the mountain, there is a solution. They can visit for a small period of time the sea and then the mountain. But if the man does not like the sea (sea and non-sea in this example), there is no solution.

If this is the case, what happens with the dipole good-bad? Or fair-unfair, moral-unethical, etc.

These are not really dipoles, they are fake ones, they are not opposite concepts, they are absonant. Evil is not self-sufficient, it is the expression of less good. The same is unfair or unethical. And this is a possible answer to what really happened to the creation. From the moment something new emerges as an internal process from the perfect Divinity or in what is expressed by the divine perfection, it can only fall short of the principle that created it. By definition, creation includes relevancy. It is less perfect than God, less good, less just, less moral, and all the “less” you can imagine! So Mr…. Lucifer, even if he wanted he could not create anything better. Therefor, this actually was God’s plan.

So to set the record straight, even in this first philosophical approach, there is from that moment onward a process that sends this gentleman along with his gang to the outermost fire. However, the fallen angels are something completely separate and different than the evil that characterizes the emotional world of mankind – which the esotericists like to call “astral level” although it has nothing to do with the stars.

You see, anarchy that exists in the creation or whatever you wish to name it – which by the way needs to have a carrier- is something totally different than the “astral mud” which an everyday man uses in his relationships with his fellow humans.

That’s where I think we should focus. As humans, we express relativity, and not trying to justify things, but it is different when a virtuous man expresses kindness of lets say 7 points on a scale of 10 than someone who expresses 5 out of 10. But, if the first by nature had to express 9 points, he is 2 points less of his capabilities. Objectively, he is less good than what he could be. If the second one was by nature of 3 points of kindness and managed to reach 5, he is 2 points up. He is therefore better than what his nature has endowed him with.

Rather naive and primitive approach to the whole subject I admit, but these thoughts are bound to come up. Of course at the end, it’s up to the Judge to place each one of us on the scales and make his final decision. Eventually, everyone is judged and sometimes the ones who seem unsuccessful by society could achieve a higher score by the Grand Judge and let us fail.

Have a good evening.

 

P.S. Do not seek to find injustice or immorality, or stupidity as if they were coming from sources of the absolute. They are well hidden in our intention to function as it suits us rather than to express ourselves according to our “being”. Attention: the “must”, the “what the world will think” and other similar novels, hides relativity and with it also evil, injustice, immorality and surely nonsense, for the one that moves against the laws of creation is a fool. I would advise him in order to understand it, to do a simple experiment. Try to ignore the law of gravity, try to fly from the balcony on the fourth floor…

Comment freely!