(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) The short version is that Hobbes and Tolstoy suggest that we are free insofar as we may do as we wish "without hindrance or constraint." Locke and Hume extended Hobbes's "freedom to do without restriction" to "the power to do or not as one wills." Spinoza's view was that we are free "insofar as we alone determine our behavior." We are not free when others dictate or hamper our decisions, or for reasons of illness or incapacity we cannot determine our actions.
...
If we are free in this way, the issue of "free will," in third density terms, becomes meaningless. This is a very shallow interpretation because it means that freedom is defined as whether a person can do what he chooses, not to the choosing itself; it refers to the freedom of the action, not to the choice of action, because all of your choices are "programmed." Yet, whatever the individual decides to do, even if programmed to do it, it is considered that he has "free will" if he CAN do it!
...
The point is: We are not free if our potential or actual choices are restricted. Locke makes an example of a man locked into a room in which he prefers to stay. The man desires to stay in the room, is able to do so, and is thus free by Hobbes's definition, but the man does not have the power to leave the room and is thus not free according to Locke!
It is in exactly this sense that most people are deceived by the Service to Self gang to believe that they have free will. The room in which they are locked is the illusion that their beliefs and objectives are the full reality of God/Creation, and their choice to remain in the room is essentially acquiescence to beliefs imposed on them from the outside.
In such terms, whether or not a person has the power to do as he wills remains a fundamentally empirical question. He may think he has complete freedom to do or not as he wills, yet, his will, his choices which are based on his awareness, may be determined subconsciously or physically by things of which he is NOT aware. In this sense, any choice or act that is based upon lack of awareness, must lead us to discover the source of the lack of awareness as the causative factor, not the choice of the chooser.
In other words, if a person is "programmed," whether via government experiments, alien abductors, religions created and imposed by hyperdimensional beings, then WHO is ultimately responsible?
Is it the "programmers," or is it the person who has effectively chosen to be unaware?
[Comment - The issue of responsibility may not be an either/or issue. On the one hand, would-be programmers bear responsibility because they are seeking to usurp the freedom of others or they are seeking to short-circuit the exercise of free will, or they are seeking to induce the exercise of free will to move in, potentially, probematic directions.
On the other hand, quite frequently, the exercise of free will is entangled with issues of trust. In other words, sometimes, when we exercise free will, we permit other people to set the rules and framework through which we engage a particular aspect of life (whether this be in relation to education, religion, government, family, or personal relationships). In a sense, under such circumstances, we have used our free will to give other people proxy control with respect to our capacity to choose.
Whether we become aware that our freely offered trust is being abused, manipulated, or exploited may not always be a matter of choice. Sometimes the possible deceit is uncovered by "accident" and, then, we have the choice of whether, or not, to permit the deceit to continue or to take steps to disentangle ourselves from such exploitation. Sometimes, someone comes along and tells us a story or presents a perspective which suggests that a particular set of forces [whether this be: the government, religion, education, corporations, parents, men, women, or 4th density hyper-dimensional STS (service to self) beings], and, then, we must try to figure out who, if anyone, is providing us with accurate information and accounts.
More often than not, we are caught between conflicting perspectives about the 'truth' of what is going on. Has our trust been abused, or hasn't it? Was the violation of trust deliberate or the result of misguided sincerity? Whose facts, descriptions, understandings, and explanations concerning a given situation are to be believed?
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) indicated that it is more difficult to detect the movements of nafs (the carnal soul, ego, seat of our rebellious tendencies concerning the truth) than it is to detect the movements of a black ant on a smooth stone in the dead of night. While, undoubtedly, there are external forces which are seeking to acquire proprietary control over the way we exercise free will, the most serious challenge to our free will may come from within - from our own nafs.
From this perspective, it is entirely possible that someone may believe or feel they are waking up when, in fact, thier nafs just may be generating a dream within themselves in which they believe they are waking up even as they remain asleep, oblivious to the machinations of the nafs to keep them away from the truth of Self. Speaking the vocabulary of Self is not the same thing as living the vocabulary of Self. People do speak in their dreams about many things, but speaking about such issues does not necessarily mean one is awake or even that what one speaks about is the truth - although one may have convinced oneself that one is in contact with the Truth.
Forces (whether from within or from without) which seek to aquire proprietary control of our free will often work with an understanding of the vulnerability of the human condition. For example few, if any of us, are able to prove the truth of all the tenets, principles, values, and ideas which form the basis of our lives.
For the most part, we lack the time, energy, resources, motivation, and/or intelligence required to track down all the requisite 'facts' or prove the truth of everything we encounter. Moroever, there are many dimensions of life which remain somewhat opaque to our inquiries or which are steeped in ambiguities and uncertainties, and, as a result, final determination may have to be held in abeyance.
Ignorance is not always a matter of choice. Sometimes this is just the way things are, and one is forced, by the very nature of life, to choose even though we may be working with less than complete information and understanding concerning certain circumstances.
The nature of life is such is that, sooner or later, we find it necessary to trust or have faith in people, things, institutions, beliefs, feelings or inclinations in less than ideal circumstances - epistemologically and hermeneutically speaking. We don't know, with certainty, what the truth is in some given set of circumstances.
The forces (whether within or without) which seek to control the direction which our free will takes know that human beings - perhaps, despite our best efforts - are ignorant of the truth about all manner of things. If one is able to win someone's trust, the free will of that person will follow, and this set of cirucmstances makes us very vulnerable - even if we do not choose to be so.
We always have the capacity to choose. We don't always have the understanding, knowledge, wisdom, or awareness to know what to choose. Moreover, even when one does 'know' what to choose, we don't always have the strength, courage, and/or integrity to choose to align ourselves with what we know to be right or true.
Waking up to the actual nature of reality is not an easy process. If it were, there would have been no need for thousands of Prophets, saints, and spiritual guides down through the ages to try, each in her or his own way, to show us the potential pathways to essential identity and the realization of one's spiritual capacity - a path that is hidden and, therefore, one which cannot be found on one's own or without assistance ... but whose assistance should we trust to help us exercise our free will with respect to such issues?
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Kant defined Free Will as the ability to initiate a new causal series. For Kant, freedom is independence of the influence of motivations, character, and external causes. It is more than just the power to choose. Freedom is the power to exercise will as reason directs, to be a first cause of events, regardless of physical constraints.
This means the ability to choose FREELY between at least TWO alternatives. It means that these (at least two) alternatives MUST NOT BE WEIGHTED to one side or another in intrinsic terms. That is, there must be NOTHING that compels the chooser to choose one over the other. In fact, it seems to be that the choice is more potent if it is made as an act of deep and pure faith, in opposition to all that is evident in material terms.
Freedom, thus defined, captures the essence of the CHOICE between service to self and service to others. To be thus free means we can SEE with our reason all or most of the influences that are imposed on us by the many forces acting in our environment, and we can then CHOOSE based on knowledge of those forces, irrespective of them.
[Comment - Why should free will be a function of what "reason" directs us to do? What is reason, and how does one know it can be trusted? Is it possible that reason, itself, requires guidance and that reason, unaided, cannot penetrate to the truth of matters? If so, then, what kind of guidance is necessary to assist reason to function properly? What are the criteria needed to calibrate reason?
Furthermore, the idea that free will can only be exercised when there is "NOTHING that compels the chooser to choose one [alternative] over the other" seems problematic. Presumably, if one is faced with a choice between something which is potentially true and something which is potentially false, then, one might hope that there is something about the truth which helps differentiate it from that which is false. Presumably, reason is operating properly when it (whether by itself or with assistance of some kind) is able to distinguish between the true and the false, and, presumably, such distinctions rest, to some degree, with the possibility that two choices are not equally weighted in the way they give expression to the truth of something.
Considered from another perspective, we are only really free when our choices emanate from whom we, in essence, are, and according to our unique spiritual capacity. Anything which deviates from this is not free because it is shaped by influences other than who we, in essence, are, and by factors other than our unique spiritual capacity. We must seek to align our interior nature with those influences which can help us to struggle toward, and unveil, this interior nature.
Initially, we must operate on the basis of resonance, inclinations toward, and being heart-drawn in order to begin to focus on possible candidates to help get where we need to go. However, there are many influences within, and around, us, and the heart, or qalb, is that which turns among influences. Consequently, the influences which draw the heart or with which we resonate must be sorted out in order to identify the wheat and the chaff. When our intentions select that which is aligned with our essential identity and with one’s unique spiritual capacity, then, we are choosing in the direction of freedom, although we are not, yet, free, because we are still operating from a perspective which is shaped, colored and oriented by influences and factors that are other than who, in essence, we are. It is this great sorting out process which constitutes the struggle of life and the lessons of experience.
In addition, it is not reason that, primarily, must direct choice, but, rather, reason, itself, must be correctly guided, purified, and calibrated so that it will be a constructive ally, instead of a capacity which can lead us away from the truth even as it employs this or that mode of logical analysis. The interior, spiritual faculties, such as the heart and spirit, must all be activated, purified, and calibrated in an harmonious fashion in order for reason to be an asset rather than a liability.
The meanderings of reason can be as problematic as are the meanderings of the heart. This is why one needs help and guidance in order to develop an interior life which is objective, sincere, committed, calibrated, and balanced. One cannot do this on one’s own, and this leaves with the task and challenge of having to choose among alternatives - all of which claim to be that which is necessary to lead one in the direction of truth and reality.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Our physical bodies are phenomena subject to natural 3rd density causality because we are part of the 3rd density world and subject to its laws. Our actions, based on 3rd density interpretations alone, are then subject to the same empirical 3rd density causality, and because causal series are continuous in time (each event has a prior cause which is an effect of another prior cause), we have no freedom at this level of phenomena.
[Comment - Laura is painting a picture of human potential as being entirely a function of a causal series, continuous in time, which emanates entirely from within 3rd density. While it may be true that we have limited freedom at this level of density as long as we are other than who we are in essence, and as long as we operate out of a framework which is other than a function of our unique spiritual capacity, the fact of the matter is, we may still have choices and intention on this level.
Laura seems not to have considered the possibility that we are hyper-dimensional beings who choose to limit ourselves to a certain level of density and dimensionality. We are passengers in a vehicle of a given density (3rd density, and this vehicle is constructed from a combination of our bodies, desires, and belief systems), but, in essence, we are not that vehicle, and, under certain circumstances, our essential potential is able to transcend the limitations of the vehicles with which we normally identify.
Intention, which is the fountain out of which choice arises, needs to be purified. One of the ways of purifying intentions is to eliminate bias, prejudice, agendas, expectations, and vested interests, and, thereby, become more objective and capable of ‘seeing’ the Truth more clearly. When intentions are purified in the foregoing manner, then, to some extent, our hearts and minds become more resonant with, or open to, the presence of the Truth, and through this resonance, alignment begins to arise through which we benefit from the Truth inherent in any authentic guidance we may be given or to which we may be exposed.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Noumenal level of reality, and freedom at this 3rd density level is impossible unless we access the 4th density causal level by SEEING via the clues apparent in 3rd density. If we can SEE the true field of options, we can choose our ALIGNMENT. THAT'S IT! But, alignment choices seem to have far-reaching effects in terms of 3rd density empirical experience.
[Comment - The key is not 4th density, per se. The key is having access to the Truth and being protected, as much as is possible, from influences which will corrupt, distort, undermine, or work in antagonism to that aspect of the truth to which we have gained access.
Authentic guidance is about emanations of Truth, and, Truth comes from many realms and dimensions - not just the 4th density. If this were not so, then, being contacted by entities such as the Cassiopaeans (and, assuming for the moment, that their intentions are honorable) would be of no use because there would be nothing within us to resonate with what the Cassiopaeans are seeking to communicate to people like Laura.
In other words, unless there is already present in us active currents of higher forms of awareness, then, we would be trapped, forever, within 3rd density awareness. There would be no means of making the transition from, say, 3rd density awareness to 4th density awareness unless the latter form of awareness were not already within us and, to some minimal degree, currently active and able to resonate with higher density insights concerning the nature of truth.
Free will is a matter of choosing among currents of possibility, both within us and without. Free will is a function of the way we choose to align ourselves, in any given set of circumstances, with such currents of possibility.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) In the deepest terms, reason is more than the domain of possibilities; it is also the realm of possible empirical worlds, of analytic constructions, of alternate conceptions, and of potential frameworks for the very conditions of experience. Because we can think about things that we have never experienced with any of our senses, we can understand that reason, making use of knowledge and awareness, can be independent of the "real world."
[Comment - The essential issue is not a matter of working toward generating ideational systems which are independent of the ‘real world’. The essential theme of importance is to develop hermeneutical understandings that are capable of merging horizons - that is establishing congruency - with the Truth, on a variety of levels - not just the surface.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Therefore, it is also possible that Reason, supported by knowledge and awareness, followed by choice, stands in causal relation to phenomena.
[Comment - There are many people (for example, addicts), who understand the nature of their problem and also aspire to be free from the addiction and know that there lives would be better if they did live in such an addiction-free life but who still, nonetheless, suffer from a weakness of the will. Reason is not enough.
Indeed, the whole realm of morality is fraught with the chasm which exists between understanding and doing. Reason cannot bridge this gap of will on its own. Reason needs internal allies.
We need motivational help to overcome the barriers to acting in accordance with what we know and understand to be true and correct. Practices which strengthen the heart - along with other interior, spiritual faculties - help place us in a position to be open to the Help which Divinity sends and which, alone, makes performance possible. ]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) In other words, if your knowledge and awareness of the reality lead you to the conclusion, via reason, that the reality is controlled, and you are not free within it, yet you can develop or comprehend the idea of a world that is NOT controlled, that is NOT limited, you can CHOOSE to align yourself with such a possible world in a deep and conscious way. This choice of alignment then becomes your connection to a THOUGHT CENTER. And the stronger your connection to the Thought Center, which is in the causal realm, the more it will manifest in your reality.
[Comment - This world which is ‘NOT controlled and NOT limited’ is not a hypotehtical construct or a possible world which is apart from reality. The world which is not controlled is part of the same reality in which the world which is controlled exists, but the former constitutes a different aspect or dimension of that same reality. The challenge/question with which each of us is faced is what aspect of reality is one going to align oneself with, and what is one going to try to do with respect to such a challenge or question?
Moreover, Laura is skipping over the fact that learning how to align oneself to a given actual world is not always straightforward and easy. It is a journey, consisting of many twists and turns, and filled with many pitfalls, and the end is not always guaranteed with success.
There needs to be a methodology. One part of this methodology is to purify one’s internal faculties, and another part of this methodology is to learn how to align one’s interior being with the Truth so that one will become both more open to, as well as, more saturated with, and affected by, the presence of Truth in our lives.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Kant is concerned only with whether an action can be both causally necessary and free at the same time. His answer is yes, if we are aware. Kant also argues that this is possible because we can have two different perspectives simultaneously on the same action.
To be free in Kant's sense gives us the power to create a new world, to redo the old, to change ourselves and correct our deficiencies with AWARENESS, which then puts our choices into an entirely different category. We can see it as an ordinary action, a choice brought into focus because of the forces around us, or other choices in our past; AND, at the same time, we can be aware of all of those factors, and choose from that position of awareness in a completely different, "Platonic reality," than the ordinary world.
We can argue that whether we indeed do have freedom is unprovable (Kant argues that the "how and why" of our possible freedom is unknowable), but given its possibility through reason, we can presume freedom to exist. And once we presume it to exist, we can then make choices based on this presumption and observe the results empirically.
[Comment - Before one begins to reach conclusions about causal necessity, perhaps, one should understand the actual nature of causality. Causality is not just a function of what occurs on the level of materiality. Causality encompasses whatever forces there may be in non-material realms which are in play and that make possible what occurs in the material realm.
Moreover, one needs to gain insight into the extent to which freedom of choice interacts with the nature of causality. Conceivably, long before one acquires the understanding and awareness needed to understand the nature of the relation between free will and causality, one will need help to survive while in a state of ignorance concerning the ultimate nature of that relationship.
If we cannot know if freedom is a reality, then, reason is really useless as a means of generating an ideational presumption that freedom exists because we could exercise reason and come to the presumption that freedom exists, when, in reality, freedom does not exist (and vice versa). Under such circumstances, reason is but a veil that keeps us from the Truth of things.
Whether we have freedom or not, we know there is Truth (that is, there is an ultimate reality which gives expression to the actual way things are), and all we can do is struggle to be open to more and more of such truth within whatever degrees of freedom may exist in relation to becoming more open in this respect. Whatever may be the truth concerning causality and free-will, we know that choice, in some sense, and intention exist because we have direct experience of such phenomena.
The issue is whether, or not, there are forces with which we can align ourselves (through causal and/or free will means) that will help assist us to become more and more open to the Truth which exists. The leap of faith which is taken concerning an affirmative answer to this question is either correct or it is not, but an awareness that such a leap may be correct is not enough to guarantee that it is, in fact, true.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Reason is the crucial concept in Kant's approach, and it is here that he makes the critical point. Reason is distinct from what we can know through our five senses, because it deals with the possibility and not actuality of experience.
[Comment - Reason is capable of dealing both with possibility and actuality. In fact, one of the challenges an indivdual is to have to try to figure out which of the possible understandings one has is most congruent with the ways things actually are.
Possible worlds which are at odds with both our actual experience and rational paradigms may be rooted in the actual world, yet beyond our normal realm of experience and understanding. Reason, and the five senses are not the only links to the actual world that we have. According to the mystics, there are interior faculties other than reason which bear upon these matters.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) Disasters, misfortunes, tragedies, ruin, destruction, adversity, suffering, pain, anguish in all the varied manifestations we find them in our world are expressions of the IDEA of Nonexistence.
[Comment - Disasters, misfortunes, and so on, are expressions of the complex interplay of the Divine Names. They are not expressions of Nonexistence, but reminders of, among other things, that we are not in control and that there is something other than us which is arranging things (irrespective of whether we call this ‘chance’, chaos, complexity, or Divinity).
Human beings may interpret disaster through the colored glasses of fear and anxiety about the idea or possibility of non-existence, but from the mystical perspective, the disasters, and so on, are but manifestations of the Divine Passion Play of Divine Names according to Himma (Aspiration). Sometimes, this passion play is painful, and this is intended to be so. In pain, there are lessons to be learned; understanding to be gained; wisdom to be developed; Truth to be struggled toward, and spiritual potential to be realized.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk - continued from before the last comment) I understood that the idea of nonexistence exists ONLY as an idea, and ONLY because in a realm of ALL Potentials, even the potential of Non-existence exists as Non-being . In the two fundamental ideas of Being and Non-being, all creation is manifested. In the act of Creation, the outrush of creative energy, half of the Consciousness of God "formed" itself into a reflection of this idea of non-being as part of the Grand Experience. And this reflection of Nonbeing is matter - it is only the half of the Consciousness of God "gone to sleep" to offer itself as the clay from which the Cosmos is formed.
[Comment - From the persepctive of mystical teachings, matter is not the clay from which the Cosmos is formed. The Names and Attributes of Divinity are the ‘clay’ from which, and through which, the Cosmos is formed, and, matter is but the set of loci of manifestation of a certain quality, structure and character which is formed by the interplay of Names and Attributes in accordance with the direction of Himma from the One who makes all manifestation possible.
Furthermore, mystics do not consider matter to be asleep. For them, matter is aware of its relationship with the Creator and praises that relationship even though we may understand not the manner of that praise.]
All of Creation - whether physical or imaginal or spiritual - is a reflection of the Real as manifested through the Hidden Treasure. Creation is not a reflection of Nonbeing, but IS Nonbeing, and this Nonbeing has the capacity (which is derivative and borrowed and, therefore, does not take away from the fact that Creation remains as Nonbeing) to reflect something of the light, beauty, majesty and so on of the One who, Alone, has Being. Whatever Being is, it is not an idea and it has qualities which Creation, as Nonbeing does not inherently have, but which are loaned to Creation to fulfill the purpose of Himma. Creation is the Idea - it is the idea of the One Who, among other things, Creates such ideas.]
Laura speaks about an outrush of creative energy during the process of creation. Why must creativity be a matter of energy? What kind of energy? What is energy?]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk - continued from before the last comment) I also understood that, in that eternal instant of "falling asleep," of compression, there was a sensation of "loss" in this half of God that "volunteered" for the role of matter,
[Comment - I don't know of any mystical teachings which suggest that ‘half of God’ volunteered for the role of matter. Moreover, on the basis of what measurement, does one come up with the idea that matter constitutes ½ of God?
Furthermore, why should one suppose that anything volunteered for anything? Perhaps, everything was by the Command and Will of God - to which we come willingly or unwillingly.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk - continued from before the last comment) and that this "sensation" is expressed as a recoil, a contraction upon itself. It is this "recoil and contraction" in flux interaction with outraying creative consciousness that establishes the "tension" of polarization which is the dynamic by which the cosmos is manifested. And, in 3rd density terms, this recoil or contraction is the essence of Service to Self; those who choose this mode, recycle into sleeping matter.
[Comment - Why should this “sensation” recoil or contract or compress unless such has been built into that “sensation”? The recoil - as was the rebellion of Adam and Eve (peace on them) and Iblis - was inherent in the fixed form which constituted the idea out of which these entities were formed? Is this really so much a matter of polarization, or does it reflect the sort of tension which is necessary in order for struggle and growth to take place?
One must pull away from reality in order to encounter illusion. During one's experience of such illusion, one may have the desire to journey back to where one began - namely, with Reality (according to one’s capacity to experience and understand that Reality.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk - continued from before the last comment) The creative consciousness half of God ...
[Comment - Again, why should one suppose that creative consciousness constitutes half of God? On what understanding and methodological engagement of the Whole is this fractional description based?]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk - continued from before the last comment)"uses" the matter that is formed by the "recoil/contraction" of the other half of God to take on form, to engage in exploration of all the ideas in the mind of God. This results in an increase it's relative energy.
[Comment - Laura and company appear to be operating from the perspective of a problematic or incorrect metaphysics and ontology. God created the idea of the fixed forms to use as a tain against which the Hidden Treasure could be reflected in the mirror created by the play of the Divine Names and Atrributes.
At best, matter is a ideational template. Such a template has no objective reality except the ‘form’ or structure to which the idea that underlies it gives to it.
Therefore, the template has no real existence and, as such, constitutes nonbeing. That is, whatever the fixed form may be, that form does not contain the quality of being which would permit it to be called Being, and, as such, it is nonbeing but existent.
The ideational template of non-being is the tain against which the Divine Names are projected, in order to create a ‘show’ of manifestation or tajalli. Finally, this notion of resulting “in an increase of its relative energy” is an idea which is not necessary and which is not warranted by any of the foregoing discussion and which, once again, seeks to reduce everything down to a physical framework or perspective. Consequently, the following “explanation” or account of things seems rather arbitrary, argumentative, and problematic.]
(From Laura Knight-Jadczyk) This "using of matter" to increase energy is felt by the sleeping consciousness/matter as "fear of loss of self." To assuage the fear, the "matter oriented consciousness" must circumscribe, limit, and restrain. It must believe that the grand constructions of illusion are not only REAL, but ALL THAT EXISTS. Physicality becomes the standard, the measure, the object of veneration. The Physical Universe is, in effect, God. This is the essential dynamic of all physical or partly physical realities, including the hyperdimensional 4th density STS reality.
[Comment - Is Laura saying that the Physical Universe is God, or she is saying that the increase in energy associated with recoil from creative consciousness generates an understanding in those people who are ruled by the fear associated with this increased energy, and that it is this understadning which leads to saying that the physical universe is, in effect, God? Whatever the answer to the foregoing question may be, the physical universe is a Divine Manifestation which gives expression to part of the Hidden Treasure which Divinity aspired or loved to make manifest.
God cannot be reduced down to the physical universe. Indeed, the physical universe is a mask that veils deeper, more essential aspects of the Hidden Treasure, and if one restricts oneself to the physical universe, one will close oneself off to dimensions of reality which dwarf, transcend, and underwrite the physical world.
One might even turn the tables on Laura and argue that Laura’s present hermeneutical position is a sort of ‘patch’ job (just like the ones she has accused others of creating in order to hide the full truth). Such a 'patch job' could be used to hide the fact that there are more levels of reality than the physical as well as more dimensions than the physical.]
Return to 'Food For Thought' Menu
|
