Creation and Expression - The Spirit of the Universe

Is there any absolute 'right' and 'wrong'? By 'absolute' I think what is meant is 'applies to ALL situations', something like a physical law, like the relationship between mass and gravity and and heat and light. In that sense, no, I would say not - but I do think there is a metaphysical law that applies.

Fundamentally, what we can say about the universe is that it IS. It exists. The universe is an expression of Creation. Everything in the universe is therefore also an expression of Creation. Even the simplest thing, like a mere pebble, must express it's is-ness, or it ceases to exist. Even The Source cannot deny it's own nature.

Life, in general, is a higher - more complex - expression of this. Even a blade of grass enjoys a much higher - more complex - dimension of existence and potential than anything inanimate. It too must express itself or it ceases to exist, but there is far more variability in it's expression and maturity. As a sprouting seed it must seek air and the sun. For it not to realize those, or for it to be denied those, is 'wrong' for the plant. Anything which assists 'expression' of the plant is 'right' for the plant. This is is a universal.

Consciousness is again a higher - more complex - expression of this, and it too has yet another higher dimension of existence and potential. It too must be able to find 'expression', and anything which hinders this is 'wrong' and anything that assists it's expression is 'right'.

Collectively, the universe too has it's 'expression', which is the sum total of all expression within the universe. The Source, by definition, is Creation. When consciousness matures it too is Creation - realizes it's Self as Creation. This is the Highest Expression. This is the Highest Good, and all expression and all morality is ultimately subordinate to it - IMO.

Thoughts?

[sound]

If it inhibits/violates life it appears to be wrong, or ineffective, if wrong feels like the wrong word to use lol ... anything which preserves life and promotes further creativity seems to be right/effective ... is it simply to do with the words we choose to use, and the baggage/connotations we attach to those words?

Greetings..

Originally Posted by Humm

Is there any absolute 'right' and 'wrong'? By 'absolute' I think what is meant is 'applies to ALL situations', something like a physical law, like the relationship between mass and gravity and and heat and light. In that sense, no, I would say not - but I do think there is a metaphysical law that applies.

Fundamentally, what we can say about the universe is that it IS. It exists. The universe is an expression of Creation. Everything in the universe is therefore also an expression of Creation. Even the simplest thing, like a mere pebble, must express it's is-ness, or it ceases to exist. Even The Source cannot deny it's own nature.

Life, in general, is a higher - more complex - expression of this. Even a blade of grass enjoys a much higher - more complex - dimension of existence and potential than anything inanimate. It too must express itself or it ceases to exist, but there is far more variability in it's expression and maturity. As a sprouting seed it must seek air and the sun. For it not to realize those, or for it to be denied those, is 'wrong' for the plant. Anything which assists 'expression' of the plant is 'right' for the plant. This is is a universal.

Consciousness is again a higher - more complex - expression of this, and it too has yet another higher dimension of existence and potential. It too must be able to find 'expression', and anything which hinders this is 'wrong' and anything that assists it's expression is 'right'.

Collectively, the universe too has it's 'expression', which is the sum total of all expression within the universe. The Source, by definition, is Creation. When consciousness matures it too is Creation - realizes it's Self as Creation. This is the Highest Expression. This is the Highest Good, and all expression and all morality is ultimately subordinate to it - IMO.

Thoughts?

A hurricane 'expresses itself' and topples trees and some lives are lost, is the hurricane 'wrong'.. the terrorists explodes themselves, 'expresses themselves', in the marketplace, killing and injuring innocent people and children, are the terrorists 'right'? expression is expression, right and wrong are illusions of judgment based on arbitrary values.. there is harmony and dissonance, and consequences of deeds aligned with one or the other, and.. judging right/wrong is an illusion that separates the experiencer from understanding the 'consequences' forward, it remains focused on the deed.. right/wrong are fixed beliefs, understanding consequences is an interactive continuation of the process..

Be well..

Originally Posted by sound

If it inhibits/violates life it appears to be wrong, or ineffective, if wrong feels like the wrong word to use lol ... anything which preserves life and promotes further creativity seems to be right/effective ... is it simply to do with the words we choose to use, and the baggage/connotations we attach to those words?

Right! It is relative to realization - in a word, metaphysical.

One analogy might be a rainbow. What is a rainbow? - a rainbow is caused by light being refracted while entering a droplet of water, then reflected inside on the back of the droplet and refracted again when leaving it. What does that mean? It explains how one is formed, but says nothing about what one is.

It is simply patterns of light with no actual substance or form behind them - but we can observe the arcing bands and see them. Interestingly, if there is a rainbow in a canyon we can see the rainbow from the top of the canyon or the bottom of the canyon. If we move towards it it appears to move away, further away and it appears to follow us - though fades with distance. the light goes in all directions, but is captured by our eyes to form the beautiful image we call a rainbow. It is only seen by an observer - it otherwise has no existence. it is only seen in realization.

Originally Posted by TzuJanLi

Greetings..


A hurricane 'expresses itself' and topples trees and some lives are lost, is the hurricane 'wrong'.. the terrorists explodes themselves, 'expresses themselves', in the marketplace, killing and injuring innocent people and children, are the terrorists 'right'? expression is expression, right and wrong are illusions of judgment based on arbitrary values.. there is harmony and dissonance and consequences of deeds aligned with one or the other, and.. judging right/wrong is an illusion that separates the experiencer from understanding the 'consequences' forward, it remains focused on the deed.. right/wrong are fixed beliefs, understanding consequences is an interactive continuation of the process..

Be well..

Thank you for your reply. I shall get to it presently.

I was following what you said through the second paragraph until you started using terms like "higher" and making claims of things being "more complex." I'm not a fan of that. These judgements are too subjective for my liking and imply a hierarchy of being that... let's just say I dislike imposing hierarchies onto nature for a variety of reasons.

Greetings..

Originally Posted by Quintessence

I was following what you said through the second paragraph until you started using terms like "higher" and making claims of things being "more complex." I'm not a fan of that. These judgements are too subjective for my liking and imply a hierarchy of being that... let's just say I dislike imposing hierarchies onto nature for a variety of reasons.

Agreed.. is-ness is sufficiently inclusive..

Be well..

[r6r6]

[Humm]Is there any absolute 'right' and 'wrong'?

Hi Humm,

"Right" = correct

"Wrong" = incorrect.

There is no cosmically absolute, correct or incorrect. There is only cause and affect determinism, within the context of a finite ergo systemically integral Universe. imho

By 'absolute' I think what is meant is 'applies to ALL situations', something like a physical law, like the relationship between mass and gravity and and heat and light. In that sense, no, I would say not - but I do think there is a metaphysical law that applies.

I would correct you, by stating that, there are no physical laws. All metaphysically cosmic laws/principles are inviolate, non-contradictory, eternal and exist complementarily to all of the physical/energy dynamics of our finite quasi-physical and physica/energyl Universe.

Fundamentally, what we can say about the universe is that it IS. It exists.

And the metaphysical cosmic laws/principles exist, as metaphysical cosmic laws/principle eternally in complement to eternally existent quasi-physical and physical/energy Universe. imho

The universe is an expression of Creation. Everything in the universe is therefore also an expression of Creation. Even the simplest thing, like a mere pebble, must express it's is-ness, or it ceases to exist. Even The Source cannot deny it's own nature.

I would correct you here again, Energy/physical cannot be created nor destroyed ergo there is no Universe "creation". Humans access mind/intellect--- so do other biologicals to whatever degree ---and discover patterns of relationships that are useful as local creation/invention to aid them in one way or another.

Life, in general, is a higher - more complex - expression of this. Even a blade of grass enjoys a much higher - more complex - dimension of existence and potential than anything inanimate. It too must express itself or it ceases to exist, but there is far more variability in it's expression and maturity. As a sprouting seed it must seek air and the sun. For it not to realize those, or for it to be denied those, is 'wrong' for the plant. Anything which assists 'expression' of the plant is 'right' for the plant. This is is a universal.

"Expression" in use above = manifestation. imho

Consciousness is again a higher - more complex - expression of this, and it too has yet another higher dimension of existence and potential. It too must be able to find 'expression', and anything which hinders this is 'wrong' and anything that assists it's expression is 'right'.

There are many degrees of consciousness. The most complex being that of humans access to metaphysical mind/intellect. Woman being a little more complex than man. imho

Collectively, the universe too has it's 'expression', which is the sum total of all expression within the universe. The Source, by definition, is Creation. When consciousness matures it too is Creation - realizes it's Self as Creation. This is the Highest Expression. This is the Highest Good, and all expression and all morality is ultimately subordinate to it - IMO Thoughts?.

There is no source of physical/energy. imho Finite quasi-physical/gravity and physical/energy Universe exists eternally in various inter-transforming phases/configurations.

Physical/energy cannot be created nor destroyed. imho

Rybo

My goodness! Some very good responses here - have been very busy lately, but will try to get to them all soon.

Originally Posted by TzuJanLi

Greetings..

A hurricane 'expresses itself' and topples trees and some lives are lost, is the hurricane 'wrong'.. the terrorists explodes themselves, 'expresses themselves', in the marketplace, killing and injuring innocent people and children, are the terrorists 'right'? ...

Be well..

These are two examples of two VERY different types and situations.

First is the difference between inanimate and conscious expression.

Yes, the earth like anything else, has an 'expression', but it is a complex physical system - like a machine, of sorts. We exist between the extremes, and otherwise would do well to avoid the extremes of operation.

The fundamental point being missed here is the transition from physical to metaphysical expression.

The example of the terrorists is a much better example, illustrating relative morality and the freedoms around it. The important point here is the principle of 'lifting' morality out of the strictly relative through informed consciousness. This is what I mean by metaphysical law - it is only realized in informed consciousness.

Does the bombing get the terrorists what they want, or does it only propagate the violence? Would the terrorists have detonated the bomb if they personally knew all the victims? With greater opportunity (education or other capacity enabling greater expression) would they have felt their only option was to brutally kill random people?

On and on, when comparison after comparison is realized in consciousness, the greater good becomes a better choice - and the greater expression of more people is realized as a result, including the terrorists.

And this goes beyond people. When realized in consciousness, properly taking care of the earth and environment is also readily seen as a greater good, again enabling the greater expression of all as well - but it must be realized in consciousness - this is what makes it a metaphysical law.

Life goes on without this realization - it is not a physical law - but in consciousness the connections and impact are obvious and undeniable.

WHY does this work? That's a good question - my best answer would be that it is something written into the very fabric of the universe - on quite another level from the physical laws.

Originally Posted by Quintessence

I was following what you said through the second paragraph until you started using terms like "higher" and making claims of things being "more complex." I'm not a fan of that. These judgements are too subjective for my liking and imply a hierarchy of being that... let's just say I dislike imposing hierarchies onto nature for a variety of reasons.

'Hierarchies' is another metaphysical concept and a very important one. Yes, I used words like 'higher' and 'more complex', but what this is really about isn't very obvious: Responsibility.

A ready example is the impact man is having on all the 'lower' life forms of the earth. The 'less complex', 'lower' consciously functioning animals, plants and insects are all subject to the 'higher' consciousness and capabilities of man, whether it is from nuclear annihilation, indiscriminate use of pesticides, fracking, or any other of a vast array of hazards. This IS NOT to brag, it is to place the burden of reasoned and aware action onto the wielder of all these threats: Us.

Another ready example: Parenting. Clearly a baby is the inferior to an adult in every physical way; in capacity, mental functioning, capability - the baby is COMPLETELY reliant on the adult - but informed consciousness knows the baby is the fulfillment of what it is to be human, and is the superior to the adult in potential. Again, it is a metaphysical realization, not a physical law. Our response from informed consciousness of this 'hierarchy' is one of responsibility.

One can object to whatever words or concepts one likes, but I think it is very useful to form perspectives and approaches that clarify both opportunity and responsibility - and ultimately the realization of the greater expression - under any name.