((This is highly confused... and difficult to read to boot.))


Lightnin (lightnin80@msn.com) wrote:
>If you mean integrated as an aspect or part of wholeness
>of self its another.

    I mean more like this last.

    Good and Evil cancel to make nothing, like positive
and negative.

    So the perfect being is all potential, all void, nothing there,
but unmanifest potential (that's a something!).

    When you say HI!, it immediately comes out of the void but
has to manifest as two people, one good, the other evil.  You can
then talk to both or neither, but not just to one for long as that
is a one way flow.

>I think its better question asked of self as a matter
>of capacity for

>Capacity for perfection....yes
>Capacity for goodness ...yes
>Capacity for evilness.....yes

     Capacity is not enough as it still leaves open the value
judgment that good is better.  We try to be good but have capacity to
be evil etc.

     I am saying something much more radical.

     If you want to have a body, you need to have two bodies, one male
and one female.

     If you want to have a girl friend, you need to have two girl
friends one smart and one dumb, or one pretty and one ugly etc.  That
way you get to have a pretty girl friend!

     As I am scanning my existence noticing the good and bad events
and valences and beingnesses, I am now immediately looking for it
opposing opposite that would neutralize it perfectly back into the

     I see myself as having become parked in one side of these things,
'good male' etc, and failing as I no longer have responsibility for
the other side 'bad female, bad male, good female etc'.

    As Electra said, dicoms should not become locked with each other.

    So if you have

    male - female
    good - evil
    beauty - ugly

    that makes for a whole mess of combinations all of which need
to be manifested and cultivated as an OT.
    Beautiful Good Male
    Beautiful Evil Male
    Ugly Good Male
    Ugly Evil Male
    Beautiful Good Female
    Beautiful Evil Female
    Ugly Good Female
    Ugly Evil Female
    Add in a few more like bright and dumb, strong and weak, and you
get a whole menagerie of beingnesses that need to be granted beingness
too and worn by the OT.

    This idea that I am going to be a Beautiful Good Male and
destroy Ugly Evil Females is nuts.

>>      For example if you tried to engage a Perfect Being, it would
>> split in two and you would have a Good Being to help you and an Evil
>> Being to hunt you down, immediate game in otherwords.

>Nope the perfect being would remain the perfect being and the 
>split would be in your perception, otherwise you have to 
>change your first statement, that the being is perfection
>and has sucessfully transcended the dichotomy.

    IN my view the perfect being is unmanifest as all dicoms are
withdrawn and self canceled into the void.

    In order to manifest the Perfect being then HAS to manifest
both sides of any dicom it wants to manifest.  It may not
do it at the same time, but it will alternate evenly to keep
the flows balanced.

    But I would prefer to just manifest both at the same time.

     I would rather have two girlfriends in every life time, one gorgeous 
and the other hideous, than to have only a gorgeous one in one life time 
and only a hideous one in another.

>>      In this view both the Good Being and the Evil Beings are
>> Imperfect beings as they are not complete.

>They would certainly not have transcended the 
>dichotomy and the capacity for both, so could not claim the
>the third which would be wholeness or perfection.

    Transcension, transchmension.

    The Perfect Being reaches into the world AS both good and evil
beings, he EXTRUDES them into existence.  When he is done with the
creation he withdraws them back into nothingness.

    There is nothing to transcend in this view.
>>      Only the Perfect Being is complete as it contains an is both.

>Yeah I agree Homer, except hes not both, he's now all three
>the capacity for all three is consciously available and he could
>then be said to be truly ethical as he has concious choice.

     You again imply that choosing the evil being is unethical.

     You are still not getting what I am saying.

     Both good and evil are of equal moral value to the perfect being
who splits into both in every act of manifestation.

     The idea that good is good and evil is bad is like saying protons
are good and electrons are bad because one is positive and the other

     One might say that good is towards creation and bad towards
destruction, but the perfect being has to manifest both at the same
time.  Trying to manifest creation without planning for its
destruction is trying to engage in a one way flow of forever ON/IS.


Homer Wilson Smith     I would rather die poor    Lightlink Internet
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF  than suffer the patronage  Ithaca, NY
homer@lightlink.com    of bigots and pinheads.    www.lightlink.com