Posted by Jboy on November 13, 1998 at 10:27:30:
In Reply to: Re: Duality and Non-Duality posted by Phil on November 13, 1998 at 08:45:22:
>>>our consciousness may be nothing more or less than one aspect of God's inner nature (once ultimately transformed). this is not to say that the converse would be true, that God is nothing more (or less) than our own consciousness.<<<<
Phil writes: >>>>may be so, jb, but without making an ontological distinction between God and one's consciousness, then how does one avoid implicating God in evil? Know what I mean?<<<<
maybe we should say:"part"of our consciousness???i dunno, but yeah! right on; i know what you mean.
this is a very important point***the other problematic that results from absolute nondualism, that derives from not drawing this ontological distinction, is the question of how God's goodness is conveyed to us without vitiating our intentionality, without ignoring our free will.***for instance, how does the East resolve the age-old connundrum of predestination?***some of the Catholicism versus Protestantism issues can be raised in the East vs West dialogue.
so great point, Phil***not implicating God in evil and not involving God in the exercise of our free will are intertwined issues.***
so here is where i make the ontological distinction: i don't know if anyone caught my thinly veiled invocations of Julian of Norwich, but i was borrowing from her "doctrine" on the Trinity. all MAY be well (the Father); all CAN be well (the Son); all WILL be well (the Spirit); all SHALL be well (the Trinity).
so, ultimately, the goodness that is conveyed to us boundlessly is the gift of the Spirit***through purgative, illuminative and unitive ways, via formation, reformation and transformation, the Spirit progressively will indwell as we cooperate.***our COOPERATION (our free will, our intentionality) is ontologically distinct***parts of our transformed consciousness (being but one attribute of our humanity) would seem to become progressively indistinguishable from the Spirit (albeit this particular trek may be an eternal one in as much as God is inexhaustable goodness). ***that we will eventually participate in one aspect of God's inner nature to the point of overflowing is a mystery that doesn't lend itself to philosophical handles.***ontologically we may be faced with an insoluble riddle, but teleologically we know we are headed for adopted siblingship with ultimate reality.
i am left only with metaphors to describe what takes place; like juandelacruz and the spiritual marriage; the two shall become one (not "as" one, but one)
spousal mysticism is a more satisfying approach to me than my entertaining the notion that i am ontologically God
at any rate, the experience of the Spirit indwelling in all peoples, East and West, will be articulated differently and described only imperfectly in all cases
that the Spirit dwells in all who cooperate, of this, i have no doubt
that any goodness indwelling in us is "part" of the Godhead seems a fair statement
that that gives rise to some people's conclusion that they are ontologically indistinct from same seems a likely result
perhaps the Spirit is like a computer "file" that is "shared" by more than one application on a system platform
it is not ontologically different from application to application (free will to free will) but is part of the "self" that each application experiences
the applications remain ontologically distinct and the teleological endproducts are unique (this appropriation of novelty is experienced as "beauty" in my aesthetic teleology)
well, i'll quit rambling before i am struck dumb, for he who speaks of the Trinity, lies peace amigo,
jboy