This is very touching I feel it relates to mental illness spiritual awakening in realizing oneself when we can accept ourselves we can accept anything when we can love ourselves we can love anything when we can change ourselves we can change the world
This was an interesting read. I see where you are going, but I have a few thoughts though.
Democracy isn’t about sameness; it’s about having frameworks that allow for difference without destruction. “Collective consciousness” is often misused as a utopian shortcut. What actually exists is a shared tension space where different ethics, values, and even spiritual views clash, evolve, and sometimes find common ground—but never perfectly align.
When someone ties the health of democracy to spiritual consciousness without clarifying their terms, it subtly implies that non-spiritual people are outside or beneath that democratic ideal.
Instead of recognizing democracy as a system that protects freedom of thought—including agnosticism, atheism, and moral pluralism—it gets conflated with some vague “spiritual light.” To me—that erodes the core premise of democracy: diversity of belief.
Thank you for taking the time to write such good insights. I think you’ll be pleased to know that I agree with. But you seemed to have missed the first section pointing to the series of articles this one belongs to. All your points are confirmed in them. I hope you’ll take the time to read through them. Thank you again.
Your article is deep, robust, and very interesting. I'll need to soak it in and reread some of it as it is thought-provoking. Thank you for sharing it.
Aloha Ohana, that is an interesting thought but I don't believe AI really "understands" spiritual things. If you are referring to the words "Mother Earth" I asked about in our chat thread, I suggest reading chapter four where it is used to get a context.
I confess, George, I think I understand your article. I found your message rather bogged down in too much language.
I understand your use of Christianity to explain your concept. I wish your explanation could have been stated in more vernacular language.
In Orthodoxy, we say things simply.
I respect your article, but if it is too cumbersome to follow, I believe your message is lost to those who get lost in your overly worded illiteration.
Thank you, Jack, for taking the time to express your views. Under normal reading criteria, you are perfectly correct. But you misunderstood the opening discussion about “translating” the meaning carried in human language into the visual meaning held in the eyes of our heart.
Without learning how to do that, you read the story on the superficial surface level of everyday literature. Envisioning it as explained, you would use every single word to permeate the veils covering our socially blinded minds and hearts.
You would be guided by the primary message of Christianity to love your enemies, anyone blinded to the light of life in them, the key part of the training. For yes, the Bible speaks of training our spiritual senses to see, but instead of receiving it, we protect our spiritual blindness as if Jesus came to blind us.
I do hope you can stop listening to the voices of the misguided long enough to give yourself a chance to see.
I thoroughly understood. And I agree with you. I just believe your theological dissertation wordiness, may confuse a layman reader, but do I respect your work.
Thank you for commenting. The principle is not a moral principle. That is the whole point of warning of the dangers of governing our conscience (suneidesis) with moral standards as opposed to the principle. Moral standards are based on right or wrong actions, which is not capable of governing the essence of our being in Name (God or Life, depending on your beliefs). Governing our being with the principle of loving the enemies of conscience is the highest state of spiritual governance, consciously joining the state of being of Name manifest in Word (Christ or Truth, depending on your beliefs). Moral standards are a guide at this point, a means to expressing the agape of the principle for those of us blind to Name in themselves.
So, no I am not using the principle as a moral principle to correct human failings. It is love for those of us blind to who we are in Word. Dualities do not dissolve in Word, for the illusion of dualities has no substance to dissolve, nor is blindness substance that needs an antidote. Blindness does not arise from awareness, it is the result of the mind denying the truth of awareness and thus misinterpreting awareness. Blindness is the inability to be and know agape, the enemy of agape. You and everyone else are agape. We do not become agape. We only need the principle to awaken to the truth and then to devote ourselves to waking others. Bless you. Agape says to everyone, “Agape, where are you?”
Jesus said that if we do not believe in him, we should at least believe in his works. Underlying all of his works is love, particularly for our enemies. When John and James asked Jesus if they should bring down fire and destroy those who did not follow him, he said no. That was a departure from the law and that is why he said that he came to fulfill the law not do away with it. That means the law is only a guideline serving the highest principle of love.
He established the idea of democracy when he did not punish those who would not follow him. For God gave us choice, the Gospel is choice. God sent Moses to punish Israel with the law, but we still think it pleases Him to follow it above love. In democracy, different moral standards are allowed, but we still must live under a consensus of common law. You follow the moral standard of Moses and have every right to. Others do not and have every right not to. We vote to establish common law, but above all, Jesus wants us to love each other and demonstrate our love in hope of persuading them to see the value in our moral standard, but above all, to love one another as he did, my brother.
The generation of World War II did not have proof of the Holocaust until after it happened. How much killing do we need to watch before we realize our hearts need to expand and unite to do something about it, without hating Israel or Hamas but knowing how to love them in their blindness. For such hatred will contract our minds and heart and unite us in hatred.
We’re sadly mistaken if we think we’re just supposed to wait around until Jesus comes back. He asked, when he comes back, will he find us doing what he told us to do, which is to love our enemies? Thus he knows we’re capable of learning how before he returns. For non-believers, this means Life expects us to use the power it has already given us. We cannot pretend we are not capable of learning.
Will it be that only those he finds loving their enemies are “God’s people”?
Bringing peace to one’s own table, while lightening another’s load WwJD
The evil on this earth is known
How one navigates it is neither right or wrong and the only judgement I have ever cared about is sacred namaste 🙏 do you best - earth school will knock the stuffing out of you
It’s up to each individual how they go through be well
Bringing peace to one's own table while lightening another's load is itself rightness, and thus violating it brings chaos to one's own table and possible harm to another's table.
That is the judgment, whether we believe it is from God or Life. It proves that we have a conscientious nature that cannot be changed, only suppressed or enlightened.
It is up to each individual how they go through it, oppressing others or enlightening them if we get the chance.
I love how you used spirituality, literature, and politics as combo for your article.
Thank you, Christopher, that is very insightful.
This is very touching I feel it relates to mental illness spiritual awakening in realizing oneself when we can accept ourselves we can accept anything when we can love ourselves we can love anything when we can change ourselves we can change the world
Thank you for your powerful insights.
This was an interesting read. I see where you are going, but I have a few thoughts though.
Democracy isn’t about sameness; it’s about having frameworks that allow for difference without destruction. “Collective consciousness” is often misused as a utopian shortcut. What actually exists is a shared tension space where different ethics, values, and even spiritual views clash, evolve, and sometimes find common ground—but never perfectly align.
When someone ties the health of democracy to spiritual consciousness without clarifying their terms, it subtly implies that non-spiritual people are outside or beneath that democratic ideal.
Instead of recognizing democracy as a system that protects freedom of thought—including agnosticism, atheism, and moral pluralism—it gets conflated with some vague “spiritual light.” To me—that erodes the core premise of democracy: diversity of belief.
Thank you for sharing this with us.
Thank you for taking the time to write such good insights. I think you’ll be pleased to know that I agree with. But you seemed to have missed the first section pointing to the series of articles this one belongs to. All your points are confirmed in them. I hope you’ll take the time to read through them. Thank you again.
Your article is deep, robust, and very interesting. I'll need to soak it in and reread some of it as it is thought-provoking. Thank you for sharing it.
I’m very grateful for your comment and hope I can answer any questions you may have.
Beautifully presented and thought provoking read. Thank you.
Thank you for your kind words.
Welcome! I’m always happy to support fellow writers, there’s some very talented writers on this platform that deserve more attention:)
aloha ohana - is there a way i can get AI to read this to me so i can better attune to what uncle george allen is sharing?
Aloha Ohana, that is an interesting thought but I don't believe AI really "understands" spiritual things. If you are referring to the words "Mother Earth" I asked about in our chat thread, I suggest reading chapter four where it is used to get a context.
I was simply asking if this is something that can be read out loud… But I worked it out. I read it out loud myself lol
lol
I confess, George, I think I understand your article. I found your message rather bogged down in too much language.
I understand your use of Christianity to explain your concept. I wish your explanation could have been stated in more vernacular language.
In Orthodoxy, we say things simply.
I respect your article, but if it is too cumbersome to follow, I believe your message is lost to those who get lost in your overly worded illiteration.
But I congratulate you for your academic work.
Thank you, Jack, for taking the time to express your views. Under normal reading criteria, you are perfectly correct. But you misunderstood the opening discussion about “translating” the meaning carried in human language into the visual meaning held in the eyes of our heart.
Without learning how to do that, you read the story on the superficial surface level of everyday literature. Envisioning it as explained, you would use every single word to permeate the veils covering our socially blinded minds and hearts.
You would be guided by the primary message of Christianity to love your enemies, anyone blinded to the light of life in them, the key part of the training. For yes, the Bible speaks of training our spiritual senses to see, but instead of receiving it, we protect our spiritual blindness as if Jesus came to blind us.
I do hope you can stop listening to the voices of the misguided long enough to give yourself a chance to see.
I thoroughly understood. And I agree with you. I just believe your theological dissertation wordiness, may confuse a layman reader, but do I respect your work.
Point well taken. I’ll work harder at putting what everyone already understands in their own heart into everyday words. Appreciate you, thank you.
Well said
Thank you, I hope it moved you to learn how to envision.
Thank you for commenting. The principle is not a moral principle. That is the whole point of warning of the dangers of governing our conscience (suneidesis) with moral standards as opposed to the principle. Moral standards are based on right or wrong actions, which is not capable of governing the essence of our being in Name (God or Life, depending on your beliefs). Governing our being with the principle of loving the enemies of conscience is the highest state of spiritual governance, consciously joining the state of being of Name manifest in Word (Christ or Truth, depending on your beliefs). Moral standards are a guide at this point, a means to expressing the agape of the principle for those of us blind to Name in themselves.
So, no I am not using the principle as a moral principle to correct human failings. It is love for those of us blind to who we are in Word. Dualities do not dissolve in Word, for the illusion of dualities has no substance to dissolve, nor is blindness substance that needs an antidote. Blindness does not arise from awareness, it is the result of the mind denying the truth of awareness and thus misinterpreting awareness. Blindness is the inability to be and know agape, the enemy of agape. You and everyone else are agape. We do not become agape. We only need the principle to awaken to the truth and then to devote ourselves to waking others. Bless you. Agape says to everyone, “Agape, where are you?”
Jesus said that if we do not believe in him, we should at least believe in his works. Underlying all of his works is love, particularly for our enemies. When John and James asked Jesus if they should bring down fire and destroy those who did not follow him, he said no. That was a departure from the law and that is why he said that he came to fulfill the law not do away with it. That means the law is only a guideline serving the highest principle of love.
He established the idea of democracy when he did not punish those who would not follow him. For God gave us choice, the Gospel is choice. God sent Moses to punish Israel with the law, but we still think it pleases Him to follow it above love. In democracy, different moral standards are allowed, but we still must live under a consensus of common law. You follow the moral standard of Moses and have every right to. Others do not and have every right not to. We vote to establish common law, but above all, Jesus wants us to love each other and demonstrate our love in hope of persuading them to see the value in our moral standard, but above all, to love one another as he did, my brother.
It’s so simple but so hard
Love one another
Hope HE COMES Soon 🔜
Amen namaste 🙏 Om Shalom
Let There Be Peace on Earth 🌍 and let it begin with me
The generation of World War II did not have proof of the Holocaust until after it happened. How much killing do we need to watch before we realize our hearts need to expand and unite to do something about it, without hating Israel or Hamas but knowing how to love them in their blindness. For such hatred will contract our minds and heart and unite us in hatred.
We’re sadly mistaken if we think we’re just supposed to wait around until Jesus comes back. He asked, when he comes back, will he find us doing what he told us to do, which is to love our enemies? Thus he knows we’re capable of learning how before he returns. For non-believers, this means Life expects us to use the power it has already given us. We cannot pretend we are not capable of learning.
Will it be that only those he finds loving their enemies are “God’s people”?
Bringing peace to one’s own table, while lightening another’s load WwJD
The evil on this earth is known
How one navigates it is neither right or wrong and the only judgement I have ever cared about is sacred namaste 🙏 do you best - earth school will knock the stuffing out of you
It’s up to each individual how they go through be well
Bringing peace to one's own table while lightening another's load is itself rightness, and thus violating it brings chaos to one's own table and possible harm to another's table.
That is the judgment, whether we believe it is from God or Life. It proves that we have a conscientious nature that cannot be changed, only suppressed or enlightened.
It is up to each individual how they go through it, oppressing others or enlightening them if we get the chance.