20151112 prc spiritual justice_competitive humanity

12/11/2015 prc spiritual justice_competitive humanity



^In these remaining few days of the self-imposed isolation and retreat from the world, temporary and partial though that has been, there is the opportunity to continue receipt of some essential guidance, not so much for the School but for the life.

In saying these things, we wish to emphasize that the exemplar of essential kindness is to be tempered with an exemplar of essential justice. The exemplar of essential justice is reminiscent of the Chinese identity connected with briefly and forming a part of the Daoist canon. The idea of the wrathful elder brother is one which has poor currency in the Western world, because it is contaminated with a misunderstanding of the term wrath. And the experience of many younger siblings who have experienced the capricious behaviour exhibited by older siblings which are anything but just.

That contamination by selfish power and control, rather than astute wise direction with the idea of mercifully applied limits to tolerance and behaviour, in secure knowledge that much more extreme behaviour could result if the merciful direction was not followed, takes the topic close to coercive behaviour and mindsets.

The idea of establishing limits applicable and required of others, is a topic whose boundaries have been tested in various degrees throughout history. Having met one of the primary identities in the Daoist canon, this one can therefore state with more confidence the necessary acknowledgement of the contained power (within it). That identity and others like it are fashioned deliberately with the objective of interacting with undisciplined humanity in ways emphasising justice.

The justice actually meted out is ephemeral, of course, and by spiritual influence to sensitive individuals. Others may only be influenced secondarily and by reference to the stories and principles shared by the direct recipients.

And so there is a fundamental distinction between ideas of justice carried into a population via the route of the spiritual exemplar, which can be contrasted with the idea of justice contained within a system of laws generated within a context of love as provided by that class of exemplar. And it is epitomised by the question “how can a person be persuaded to act generously in the interests of community and not selfishly and exclusively in their own interests by which to win advantage in competitive family and culture?”

The convoluted nature of discussion concerning the generation of law, the application of law, the complexity of case law, the sophistication of individual argument and the complexity of strands of desire to hide incriminating strands of desire, are such as to render the application of the law far from the ideal in many instances. This is where a parallel exemplar requiring justice has some merit in addition to the exemplar of intrinsic loving kindness.

The situation is made more complex because of the capacity of non-loving spiritual nature to persuasively and deviously emulate the exemplar of rigorous justice. And so both patterns require sophisticated verification in order to attain to confident application of the results.

So by this we refer to the potential for application of spiritual enquiry to issues of justice in human society. The idea that a sensitive person may make such enquiry is almost absent in Western culture. The idea that a system of archived law and legal principle can be reliably applied so as to obtain that level of just outcome is even yet somewhat poorly understood in Eastern culture. And yet both are best applied in any given situation. This is the distinction between so-called divine law and human law. And so although there is often a distinction made between the application of divine law principles and human law principles, the reason is the contrast between the focus on those two classes of exemplar. The idea of inviolability is one of the differences. The urge to violate another person and particularly where there is lesser power, in other words, a power imbalance, can lead to the natural and immediate perception that there need be no limit to the degradation applied to that lesser person. This is fully consistent with the principles of animal level behaviour and comprises the classical win-lose result.

The recognition that everybody has equal rights is a reflection of the spiritual principle that everybody is equal in their status as an embodied spiritual identity, has been idealised in Western law. The contrast between these ideals and natural animal-level dominance and subversion could not be more stark. Nevertheless it is in the nature of the human to seek personal advantage at the expense of others and therefore the principle of fair treatment to all is essentially foreign to the human animal. It is only by remembering who one is at the level of spiritual identity that a bridge of principle can be built between those opposing viewpoints.

We speak of these things in the context of the situation presently existing whereby the tolerance has been extended too far towards an individual acting purely from the seeking of competitive advantage. The only remedy in that situation is to create distance in space and time for suitable reflection on the basis of principle. There is no hardship in that, no genuine hardship, although there will be much felt hardship. That felt hardship relates almost entirely to the rejection of possible competitive advantage gained by the application of spiritual equality and fair dealing.

The existence of the variety of impulses and principles inherent in a modern democracy such as this small country of New Zealand, carries the opportunity for dissociation from the principles of law. And that is routinely taken by individuals who have never understood the principles of equality between all members of society, based on the principle of spiritual equality and loving nature. It is only when those principles are rigorously applied in a way uncontaminated by power disparity and self-interest that it becomes possible to re-orient the perceptual capacity of the individual concerned. And so there is a class of individual, and it is not small in relation to the total population, where by early experience, the indoctrination into the understanding of power relations as prime determinant of social consequence is indelibly inscribed upon their consciousness.

The principle therefore of essential spiritual equality and the specific behaviours which necessarily reflect that into the formation of principles and application of justice and fair dealing between individuals, is seen as idealised, ephemeral, altruistic and irrelevant. The conversion of such individuals from a condition of valuing only the blindingly obvious power relations as primary determinant in the seeking of personal advantage, means that their conversion into a condition of preferring the spiritual principle basis of action is quite unlikely.

And so it easily becomes a condition whereby these human level and spiritual level sets of principles are placed in apparent opposition, whereby a choice is very often made from one or the other and without a judicious blending of the two. Recognising that one is embodied, therefore the rules of embodiment in this competitive human species requires recognition of empowerment and dis-empowerment, the win-lose motivation and imperative and the irrelevancy, it is often experienced as, of the principle of equality derived from spiritual existence.

The astute observer and most other individuals as well are fully cognizant of the principles and application of the condition of embodiment and all that that implies. The experienced spiritual identity, on the other hand, never forgets the hard-won principles, based on extreme experience during embodiment and the sense of injustice so often generated. And so they prefer the principles of equality derived from equal value in spiritual identity, no matter what the level.

And so the contest between these two systems of thought, principle and application is very instructive for many individuals, this one included. It is the primary driver generating the distinction between the principles of law in this country and the principles of justice and the experience of the results of legal process.

P Oh my goodness! I think I'll find there is quite a lot to think about in this delivery.

[1350 words]


Peter Calvert - AgapeSchoolinz

Friday, 17 February 2017 (1)