T.L.C.
So you’re saying that no matter what topic I
focus on, it’s impossible for me to know all there is to know about it.
Big
D Yup!
Think of the last time you made a major error.
While you were being wrong, did you know you were being wrong?
T.L.C.
Of course not! That’s
the nature of being wrong.
Big
D And prior to making
that error, if you’d had additional information, would you have come to
different conclusion and taken another course of action?
T.L.C.
Of course!
Big
D So, what’s the
difference between then and now?
T.L.C.
I now have an increased amount of knowledge, information, and awareness.
Big
D Do you think its
possible that you could be wrong about something right now? Could
you be
missing a vital piece of information without even knowing that that piece is
missing?
Could something you think is true actually be false or vice versa?
T.L.C.
Yes, of course.
Big
D Let’s look at human
awareness for a moment. Life
appears to function on a continuum between the two opposite poles on a scale we
call consciousness. On the
God end is pure consciousness, and on the physical matter end there’s a rock
which, from the human perspective, appears to have no consciousness at all.
Humans
live in a unique position along that consciousness scale.
Humans are able to bridge the gap between matter and energy, between
physical and non-physical, between no consciousness and total consciousness.
On that scale, humans are at the top of physical reality and at or near
the bottom of non-physical reality.
In
comparison to the super consciousness, which knows all there is to know, the
amount of awareness that a human holds is so infinitely small that it is, in
essence, nothing
at all. Einstein said that
quite well when he said, “I now know that I know nothing.”
T.L.C.
And what do you suppose he meant by that?
Big
D You’d have to ask him
to be sure, but here’s a reasonable guess. Relative to all there is to know, what I know is
so little, it’s nothing at all. And as the Ancient Hermetic Principle say's,
All Truths are but half truths.²
T.L.C.
Well then, if you consider how limited the human perceptions are, we’re
all, to use your elephant analogy, peddlers of elephant
parts.
Big
D Amen!
T.L.C.
Hold the amen for a moment. I’m not quite done yet.
I have one more question. Given
that we are aware of such a small piece of all there is to perceive, how can we
be certain that we're doing the right thing in promoting or denying such things
as global warming or gender equality or gay rights?
Big
D Each person needs to
answer that type of question for him or herself and only about him or herself.
To come up with your own answer, first, create a context of love and then
answer your question within that context.
T.L.C.
Please offer an example of that.
Big
D OK. Here’s an example
of what one might choose:
My
basic context
is to create the greatest love, the greatest joy, and the greatest
freedom for myself and for the greatest number of others.
My context is to be positive or neutral in my effect on myself, on others
and on my environment.
My
context is to take actions that maximize love, care, and compassion for myself
and for all others while minimizing the costs in time, money, resources, effort,
lose of life, (human or otherwise) and physical and emotional pain. My context is to
serve myself and my fellow God-Beings to the best of my ability.
Because
I can never know with absolute certainty that my decision is the right one, I
tend to be somewhat biased toward the side of correctible mistakes.
T.L.C.
How does that relate to any specific issues such as those we just
mentioned?
Big
D
Since
we are talking about making very significant, life-altering decisions for
someone else, it would seem reasonable that we should base our action on the
available evidence and not simply from personal and religious beliefs.
Ask yourself these
questions: Do I have a right to impose my will on the lives of other people? Or is it more appropriate for me to honor God-granted right of
self-determination? Shall I
force my ways onto others, or shall I simply share my views with
them, and then support his/her right to make his/her own choice regardless of what that choice is? Or should I take
the third option and simply stay away from both sides in this controversy?
Shall we simply allow all the mountain glaciers
to melt without questioning why and simply leave billions of people with out water in the dry
season? 
.
