The Principle Expanded

2006-10-25 04:46:00

Dan writes:

"I am having trouble reconciling/understanding some of your teachings or at least my interpretation of them.

"Recently you taught the "Principle of the Just Use of Force" which is:

"'Authority and force is a positive thing if it is used to restrict those forces which restrict life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Freedom cannot be imposed. It can only manifest through free will when those conditions, which prevent freedom, are restrained.'

"From which I derived this:

"One must use logic, reason and intuition (judgment) to find and follow the highest path he can conceive (think of) until such time as full, continuous Soul Contact (DIVINE wisdom/guidance) is achieved, which will allow him to truly KNOW."

JJ:

Correct, with the additional comment that judgment is an eternal principle and the seeker continues to use it after soul contact, even after he becomes a Master or a Logos. Every creation, even by the highest lives, is the result of a judgment followed by a decision.

The principle I gave on the use of force is a general rule that must be interpreted with judgment. It must be interpreted with good judgment to produce a consistent accurate response.

Dan:

"Use of force (coercion) is JUST when used to impede that which imposes on freedom of choice (freewill)."

JJ:

"This is an ingredient for just use of force, but the disciple must see the principle behind the words to apply it correctly. Some uses of this principle are pretty much universally agreed upon. For instance:

The laws against kidnapping create a just use of force to prevent criminals from abducting an individual against his will.
If our nation were attacked by an enemy with intent to enslave us most would agree to use force to stop this.

A more fuzzy area would be something like:

Making a law to force the smoker to not smoke in a restaurant so he cannot force you to breathe smoke.
A law requiring to you carry car insurance when you may not desire it.

Definite misuse of this principle would include:

A child using violence against his parents because they take away his freedom to eat lots of sugar and force him to eat a good diet.
Laying siege to the courthouse because you do not like the speeding laws that you think restrict your freedom.

Dan:

"Maya, glamour and illusion are each deception (by self or other) on one of the three planes: physical, astral, or mental that limit a man's freedom of choice by causing (deceiving) him to believe he IS (can BE) limited."

JJ:

This creates a problem with the just use of this principle.

Dan:

"Love is served by doing the best for OTHER (in objective terms of relief from ignorance - growth toward truth), which IS (also) the best for SELF.

"Conclusion: A truly loving, just man that thinks his brother is suffering from/in illusion, is duty/love-bound (justified) to use force to combat that illusion in order to free his brother of it.

JJ:

This will depend on a number of factors. Is his brother suffering from the lack of freedom and is he seeking greater freedom? Liberation must be invoked to be successful. Until that invocation comes the liberator will plant seeds of freedom that will mature later.

Dan:

"Forms of coercion in ascending order of severity (karmic effect): 1. Mental - Logical argumentation, reason, common sense. 2. Astral/emotional - Use of lower emotional (solar plexus) energies to persuade, charm, charisma, emotional appeal. 3. Physical - obvious, all forms of physical restraint up to killing the vehicle (true SELF can't BE harmed or interfered with)."

JJ:

Good insight to see that force can be applied on the various planes. It is important to realize that liberation must come from when the offence originates or higher. Mind must liberate mind. Mind or emotion must liberate emotion. Mind, emotion or physical force must liberate the physical. Physical force must not be used to force the feelings or mind, though it is misused in this direction by many.

Dan:

"Why is it not helpful, even loving, to (as gently as possible) point out a person's illusions if you should happen to even THINK you have become aware of one? By their very nature they are very hard for the person suffering from them to see but SHOULD be much easier for a more objective perspective like that of a detached friend. And after all if it's not true, what REAL is lost (except of course possibly a friend :-)? And if true, just LOOK at what the friend has GAINED thereby!

"Or is it just that direct confrontation is not always the WISEST thing to do? Cuz it DOES seem to disturb the beast MIGHTILY."

JJ:

I find it to be a waste of time to point out a person's illusions when they are not ready for the information. Instead I give out many writings that point the way to discovering illusion for those who are ready to see them.

Unless someone is being obnoxious I will rarely point out his faults and illusions.

The rule of thumb I use is to wait until I am asked and even then the person will often get angry because they will think I am absolutely wrong and am attacking them.

John C writes:

"John mentions the disciple Nathanael in his Gospel. (John NEVER uses the word apostle in his Gospel, but he does in Revelations, which I think is interesting.) Anyway, most biblical scholars believe Nathanael is the same person as Bartholomew. Do you agree?"

JJ:

It is entirely possible. Nathanael means "gift from God," essentially the same meaning as Matthew and Mathias. It's possible that a secondary name was used for him to supply the meaning necessary for the needed foundation stone for the New Jerusalem.

"Look at all the sentences which seem true and question them."
-- David Reisman