PART 1
Now I am going to write about this
text: You may, if you so wish, skip directly to the text by finding”1’
it is the current version of a post in my blog
johnnysonneborn.blogspot.com, “The Most Important Principles.” It has been
greatly developed since the previous posted version, and I do not expect to add
to it
[I will soon be posting several recently-written short
pieces.]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE MOST IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES
This post is my attempt to crystallize some standard teachings of
Unificationism, especially as written in Exposition of the Divine Principle,
also in New Explanation of Unification Thought, sometimes
elaborating/explicating, while suggesting new English terminology, (which
are underlined.) in some cases. The framework is partner
theology/project theology.
The text is written from a humanist perspective so that it could be used
in all cultures, with a presenter tweaking according to the culture. [Since
I am sending this to you, I have inserted references to one or both of those
books. I am also informed by public talks by True Mother.] Although this
opening segment covers much of chapter 1, it is mostly about the chapter’s
section 2.1: Give-and Take Action, and I am hoping to receive critique. [In bracketed
references to EDP, the first number refers to the part of the book])
This first part begins with an assumption. On the foundation of the assumption, general
principles are given, putatively elucidating how the human mind thinks.
PART 2 will set forth principles relevant to our
common life riddled with pain.
ASSUMPTION
1. Every human being has the fundamental
irrepressible impulse to give love to the greatest scope imagined.[NEUT 3.II.A]
1.1.
Unlike other species, a human being’s imagination becomes unlimited
upon the person reaching adolescence.
HUMAN MATURATION
2. Each human
develops toward spiritual and physical maturity by the force inherent in the creation
principle.[EDP 1.1.2.3.1] This has also been called “innate intelligence”.
Within the creation principle, there are sub-principles, as follows.
3. Development
occurs through three stages: forming, growing, and completing. [1.1.5.2.1]
Jesus teaches an explication of these in Mark 4:26b-29.
3,1. Emotional growth occurs when love is given
and received, enabling giving of love to a greater social scope, longer
duration, and/or depth. (In Unificationism, the enabling is caused by new truth
given by God. [1.6,31).
3.1.1 Action, above, is intended to benefit its
recipient. Since the recipient’s fundamental impulse is to give love, it
follows that the loving action should enable the recipient to love more greatly.
.
RELATIONSHIPS AND NETWORK
4. The existence of any entity can be described as one
or more four position foundations, which are networks of subject-object
relationships. [I.I.1.2.3-4]
5. A subject-object relationship exists in a
project and is established/formed as follows: [1.1.2.2] a would-be subject
partner advertises as such in a new project; another entity declares interest
in becoming an object partner and gives self-information, thus standing
symbolically in the object position; the subject partner expresses a desire for
the other to be a substantial object partner and states the processes and rules
for the project; the other expresses the desire to join the project as
described. (In Unificationism all
relations somehow occur “through the agency of the fundamental energy of God.”
[1.1.2.1-2]. Subject-object projects exist between human beings and within a
human being, and we may describe such interrelationships in the microworld.[1.1.1]
5.1 . Within a project, an
object-partner entity should obey any subject-partner’s directive that is in
accordance with the rules of the project: in the case of a project of human
beings, a person is always free to leave the project. (In a subproject of the
project HSA-UWC, even though the norm is always to obey, there is an
exception-- if a person thinks it likely that obeying the directive will result
in a catastrophe, he or she should write a message to the directive giver,
asking that person to send the message to that person’s subject partner,
requiring guidance.)
5 .2 .
An object partner is not passive. The partner offers information and may
offer suggestions. As offerer, the partner is in the subject position: giving
and responding, alternation of position, is continuous. [I.1.3.1.2] Yet, the subject partner ultimately
determines action, having` taken responsibility for the project and with a
greater awareness of the greater project within which the project is
itself a sub-project. (In Unification Theology, Heavenly Parent's project is
the all-encompassing one.)
5.3. There are types of subject-object partnerships. In one type, the subject partner has delegated to the object partner responsibility for part of the project (with the object partner thus poised to stand as the subject in a smaller project). The subject partner is then bound to unite with and support whatever the object partner says or does.
5.3.1 In another type, functioning according to the principle of dual purpose, the subject-partner is designated to pursue investment toward widening or deepening the project’s impact (purpose/interest of the whole); the object-partner, being responsible for maintaining the project and developing it (purpose/interest of the Individual), may warn the investing partner that the risk involved in that investing appears intolerable, yet cannot override it I think that the relationships in this horizontal form are ultimately ones of increase and decrease, with those in the other form ultimately ones of internal and external.
6. At least when
a project exists as a sub-project, it may be located in a diamond figure
quadruple base [1.1.4.3], as follows. At the diamond’s apex stands the greater
project; the narrower project’s subject partner and object partner stand at the
diamond’s sides; the fact of their union fills the remaining point. With this,
the occupant of any point may be seen in relation to that of any of the other
three points.
6.1
When a project is aiming for a specific effect, the purpose of the
effect, which is the project, stands at the apex of a temporary quadruple base,
with the result at the bottom: then the subject partner or object partner takes
the project into consideration when choosing actions. [NEUT I.2.A.] When
projects, described as quadruple bases, exist in a hierarchy of ever greater
projects, activity exists in a spiral [1.2.2.4].
7. In projects of persons (having
minds) a subject partner is always expressing love, and an object partner
returning beauty.
ETHICS
8. The fundamental ethical principle guiding
thinking beings is that of dual interests [1 1 3 1]: an action chosen toward fulfilling an
interest of the self (object) should be taken only if it is hoped that this
will enable the person better to contribute towards the interest of the whole project,
represented by the subject, who proposed
it, while actions taken for the fulfillment of the interest of the whole should
always respect the dignity of individuals affected by it and facilitate the
attainment of their self-interests. [This duality may be the creation principle
itself: building upon an existing foundation – developing while maintaining a foundation.]
9. God’s three blessings to each human being, told in Judaism’s creation myth[11.3.1], embody complexification and indicate that a perfectly mature human being takes the subject position toward any entity in the natural world or to any angel [1.1.5.2].
THE IDEAL
CONCLUSION. We can
imagine a reality in which all persons live/act according to these principles –
a world of lovingness and joyfulness [1.15.3.2][1.2.4.6][1.3.1.2]. However,
reality as we experience it is one of sorrow as well as happiness and can be
analyzed as featuring pain, Impatience, fear, anger, and conflict.
PART 2
In my explanation of
principles for painful reality, my goals of crystallizing Unificationism and
writing humanistically necessarily diverge. The reader interested only in the
principles derived from this reality can search for the suggested “origin” of
social and psychic pain, or for ”10” for the principles.
I will begin with an analysis of Unificationism’s corruption myth on the
foundation of its creation myths adopted, interpreted, and adapted from
Judaism's.[For a humanistic telling of this legend, find “Restatement”]
Almost all cultures that survive have
such a mythology that implicitly contain norms for social relations and for
individual behavior. The norms almost always support the stability of family
life, thus promoting the culture’s survival. Judaism's also greatly values the
lives of individuals. Judaism's core mythology was spread by Jews, Christians,
and Muslims to most of the world. It was in cultures developed from this that
productive industry was created. In
modern times, some of these cultures or sub- cultures abandoned the mythology,
while keeping the valuation of individual lives.
[1..3] It is not unreasonable to
think that the ancestors of all human beings living even before the arrival of
civilization (other ancestral lines having died out) were twins, having evolved
from a previous species in an opportune environment. During childhood the boy
and girl separated from the maternal species and formed a project whose goal
was the full maturation of each. They exchanged love and beauty, helped each
other, and exercised their creativity in exploring the environment. The girl,
intuitively preparing for motherhood, was more protective of foundations they
had developed. The boy, intuitively preparing for developing the foundations,
was more adventuresome.
[1.3.1]. In Unificationism, which interprets Genesis
3, they are Adam and Eve.
The fruit equals Eve’s love. Its tree equals
Eve. Ev[JN1] [JN2] e’s
eating the fruit equals making her love one with her. It is also described as
consummating her love.[1.2 4] The tree of life equals a perfectly mature human
being; in its first mention, Adam.[1.2.1] This, combined with God’s statement
that if the humans ate from the tree of life, they would live forever [1.2.1], and with one of the reasons that God did not
act to stop the Fall, indicate that if he had, humans would have remained in an
immature state, having their love become one with them prematurely.[1.2.6.3]. The serpent equals the archangel Lucifer [1.2],
created as the children’s servant and teacher and as the channel of God’s love
to other angels.[1.2.2.1]
[1.2.2.1]
Lucifer, recognizing that God’s love for the children was immensely
greater than that for him, naturally felt envy. This developed into jealousy of
Adam to the point where he considered trying to replace him as the central
channel of God’s love. It is not
clear why he decided to dominate Eve, other than that Genesis says so (its
purpose being to lead to Genesis 4, in which, Eve refuses to take
responsibility for her action and is cursed with her desire being toward Adam).
[1.2.2.1.]
On a fateful day, when Eve had matured to the top of the growing stage,
the archangel proposed to her a project for the consummation of her love, with
himself standing in the subject-partner position, and Eve, naturally respecting
the angel, responded with interest in such consummation. Thus, through the
agency of the Universal Prime Energy, the two formed a reciprocal base. The
angel then began to outline the steps to be taken and desirable consequences.
At this point, the force inherent in the Principle that had been endowed to Eve
by God to guide her maturation and through which God would govern her during
her immaturity (growing being intrinsically autonomous) pushed her to pause,
and this was manifested in her original mind and in the formation of her
conscience. There were two reasons for this: according to the creation
principle, it was one of the kinds of activities that were meant to be shared;
it was meant to be performed when she had become more mature emotionally and
able to imagine the thoughts and feelings of her twin. Eve expressed reluctance to the angel, and he
responded with counter arguments. Eve, immature in intellect, not yet stable
emotionally and already beginning to feel horizontal love for the angel, abandoned
her faith in the internal guidance and its warning, and greedily responded, and
the two established a common base and began give-and-take action. Eve, becoming
enraptured by the Archangel’s proposal, her developing self-interest desire to
consummate her love ignoring the interest for the whole --her sibling
relationship with Adam--increasingly felt foreboding. Eventually, her love for
the activity, self love, overrode the power of her innate intelligence, and she
became unable to stop, as also did the archangel, and impulsively they became
one.
The angel felt dread, having abandoned faith
that God would eventually fulfill all his desires. [1.2.2.1] Eve, in their
oneness, received the dread from the angel.
He came to be called Satan [1.2] because of his mind
to accuse God and to accuse Adam.[1.2.3]
[1.2.2.2]
Eve, having abandoned the project
she shared with Adam for the archangel’s, tried to reenter it based on her
feeling of fear and to undo the cause of her painful guilty conscience. Having
learned clearly about sexual intercourse, Eve proposed to Adam what was, in
fact, a new project, in which she would stand as the subject partner. Adam,
seeing Eve in the confused state and having abandoned their project, was
weakened and, after not so much hesitation that was prompted by his principled
force and conscience, readily entered into reciprocal relationship and then
formed a common base with Eve. The ensuing giving and receiving action then propelled
them into substantial sexual intercourse. The Archangel thus came to dominate
not only Eve but also, through her, Adam and, through them the natural world.
Unificationism gives among God’s
reasons for refraining from intervening in these tragic developments, respect
for the dignity of the humans who had been given free will responsibility to
grow according to the creation principle [1.2.6.1], and refusal to accept their denying growth to the
completing stage, which would have prevented the realization of the ideal for
each to become perfectly mature, [1.2.6.2] symbolized by the tree of life.
The boy and girl, each refusing to accept responsibility for
their selfish actions, could not relate in full harmony. When they finally did
beget children, their internal confusion and their disharmony affected even
their reproductive process as well as the nature of their parenting.
Human beings, conceived and growing up in
such circumstances, descendants of the couple whose choice to follow the
selfish will overrode the force inherent in the creation principle, having
inherited dread, guilt, and fear, have been continuingly tempted to act in
violation of the principle of dual interests[1.2], even though many
display altruistic behavior as early as the second year of life.
Restatement
In order to restate from
a humanist perspective Unificationism’s corruption myth on the foundation of
its creation myths, I first note that the effectiveness of such a myth lies in its
offer of guidance for the lives of the people. This is possible because the
components of the myth symbolically refer to features of the natural order. The
task here, then, is to demythologize the unnatural components of these tales as
finally written in Genesis 3 and 4., to find secular references for God, and for the archangel and interactions among God, the archangel,
and the two humans.
It is easier to unmask the
Archangel Angels know laws and principles of created
reality. They pass on this knowledge to other existing entities, thus
supporting the maintenance of the entities. As maintainer, the Archangel is
supporting the interests of the self. (in Unificationism, for each feature of
created reality, there is a feature within each human being that relates to it
[1.6.2.]; thus the feature relating to angels, could be self-interest.)
It would be more difficult to restate
relationship with other angels, unmasking its meaning….. Perhaps a hierarchy of
self interests.
In Judaism’s corruption myth, a penalty for the woman’s
refusal to take any responsibility for having been seduced is that her
“desire will be for the man”.(Gen 3:16b)
This desire, with its implicit mental dependency, becomes addictive.
God, for reasons given
above, does not appear in this first stage of Unificationism’s interpretation
of Judaism’s corruption myth. God appears in Unificationism’s recounting of Genesis 3:16b, in which, after the
children refuse to take responsibility for their actions, God, first pronounces penalty consequences,
and then gives them clothing. This is the first step in God’s guiding and helping
human beings to regain freedom and recover and gain intimacy with Him.
[1.5.2.2] In Unification theology,
God does not directly govern immature human beings. God endowed each human with
the irrepressible desire to give love to the greatest scope imagined. God then
governs human beings through the force inherent in the Creation Principle. That
when a human being, guided by the force, has given love and had the love
received, becomes ready to give love to a greater scope, is attributed to God’s
giving him or her more truth and love. [1.6.3.2] However, internal truth and
external truth are properties of a human being, and the impulse of giving true
love is ready to manifest itself in a person’s emotions given the reception of
beauty and the recognition of a new level of opportunity. Accordingly, having
stated the impulse at the start of this text, I will restate the myths
substituting simply the principled force in place of God, calling it, as I have
above, innate intelligence.
The origin of
painful reality.
It is not unreasonable to think
that the ancestors of all human beings living even before the arrival of
civilization (other ancestral lines having died out) were twins,(in
Unificationism, they were the boy Adam and the girl Eve ( [1.1.1] having evolved
from a previous species in an opportune environment Garden of Eden[1.1.1]. ( In Unificationism,
they were just created by God [1.1.1]
During childhood the boy and girl separated from the maternal species
and formed a project whose goal was the full maturation of each [1.1.1.1]. They
exchanged love and beauty, helped each other, and exercised their creativity in
exploring the environment. As they physically matured, they were able to give
love to each other at increasing depths, and so were growing
spiritually/emotionally as well.[1.6.1.2] The girl, intuitively preparing for
motherhood, was more protective of
foundations they had developed. The boy, intuitively preparing for
developing the foundations, was more adventuresome.
On a fateful day in their adolescence, the girl, alone, thought of an
activity that seemed as if it would be pleasurable. (In Unificationism, the
thought is suggested by the Archangel Lucifer.[1.2.2.1]) [1.2.2.1]She
considered it positively and soon began engaging in it. Soon her innate
intelligence, manifesting in her conscience, impelled her to pause and examine
it in relation to the project, the interest of the whole. There were two
reasons for this: according to the creation principle, it was one of the kind
of activities that were meant to be shared; it was meant to be performed when
she had become more mature emotionally and able to imagine the thoughts and
feelings of her twin.[1.1.3.3 This caused her to reflect; however, at that age
of growth, her intellect was not sufficiently developed to be sure if this
self-interest activity was appropriate for the project. [1.2.5.3] However the girl, immature in
intellect and not get stable emotionally and already beginning to feel love for
the activity, abandoned her faith in the internal guidance and its warning, and
greedily continued in the activity. Eventually, her love for the activity overrode the power of her innate
intelligence, and she became unable to stop[1.2.5.1] until exhausted.
[1.2.2.2].Now alone emotionally as well as physically, the girl felt
dread. Having abandoned the project she shared with her twin, feeling pain from
her conscience and, being alone and separated from any interest of the whole,
she also felt fear.
[1.2.2.1] As the girl now had come to know clearly, what she had only
dimly sensed, the outcome of the activity, she proposed to the boy sharing the activity in
an attempt to reenter their project, but what would be, in fact, a new project,
in which she would stand as the subject partner. He, seeing her in the confused
state and having abandoned their project, was weakened and, after not so much
hesitation that was prompted by his principled force and conscience, readily
entered into a reciprocal relationship
and then formed a common base with her . The ensuing giving and receiving
action then propelled them into sexual intercourse.[1.2.2.2]
Their new project was not the maturation of each, but
the satisfaction of each centered on each one’s selfish desire.
RESPONSIBILITY
10. in our painful reality, the
innately urged responsibility of each of us to grow to emotional and physical maturity
is difficult, if not impossible to fulfill, for the following reasons.
10.1 In early childhood, each of us acquires from
our caretaker(s) the inclination to overvalue the purpose of the self, and so
shy from acting towards the whole interest: this inclination exists along with
the natural inclination for altruistic behavior.
10.2 Each of us exists as an object partner in one
or more projects. We entered a project at the invitation of the would-be
subject partner, who assured us that developmental action would also benefit
us, either immediately or in due time, In accordance with the principle of dual
interests. Each of us also exists with
unnatural fearfulness, also acquired from the caretaker. This is not a natural
fear appropriate to our being a human, such as the fear of a newborn upon
feeling the strength of the force of gravity and sensing distance from a solid,
nor instructed or experienced fear such of
touching something too hot. Accordingly, we experience fear when
developmental action is about to be undertaken, fear that we will be depleted
without due compensation. In the normal
development of a project, this fear is overcome by our well-grounded faith in
the subject partner. However, when, impelled by our fundamental impulse to give
love more greatly, action is contemplated to give love to another person
stimulating the receiver to pass on the love, fear is heightened . Love offered
to another is an investment entailing risk. If our offer is received, we and
the receiver unite as an expanded project more able also to benefit ourselves.
However, we know that the receiver may (for reasons that I will soon mention)
refuse to, in turn, love more greatly, so that unity will not occur and we are
left with depletion of our resources. Overcoming our fearfulness is faith in
the project's plan, ultimately in the subject partner, and belief that the
subject partner participates in projects ultimately stemming from
person{s} of solid goodness. This means that we require courage to have faith
in our subject partner, and, If the fear is too great, we are strongly tempted to
act instead for our own benefit, either to hoard resources or to aggressively
seek acquisition, in both cases fearing future insufficiency, exercising our freedom to leave the project and
embark on our own. It is because we know our own temptability that we know that
the intended receiver of our offer of love will be tempted to refuse it and may
succumb.
10.3 Further, if our offer of love is rejected,
our will to love is strengthened, but there has been no return of beauty
encouraging giving to a greater scope. Instead, of feeling joy, we, deprived of
the object of love, will feel sorrow, the intensity depending upon the depth of
our lovingness.
10.3.1
Fortunately, running beneath a potential rejecter’s inclination to
overvalue an object of self interest and his or her fearfulness is his or her
fundamental impulse to love more greatly. Considering this should lessen our
own fearfulness, and we may gratefully appreciate it.
10.4
An additional cause of not acting upon a desire to further the interests
of the whole is uncontrolled addiction. Common addictions include addiction to the effect of
alcoholic beverages, of narcotics, and of satisfaction of sexual desire. In
general, while any pleasurable activity may be intrinsically good, one should
avoid over indulging in any, lest strong attachment to the expected pleasure make
it difficult to act for the purpose of the whole. We may consider fearful attachment to a food
source, to the well-being of one’s family excluding activity for the sake of
the community, of one’s community excluding the sake of the nation, and one’s
nation excluding the sake of the world also to be forms of addiction.
10.4,1
Ritual sacrifice is a method for harnessing addiction. Symbolically or
actually, the next object or action to which we are attached is placed where we
cannot access it. Then, when contemplating any such object or action, we
remember that we had sacrificed the next one, putting it away, and so are
extremely reluctant to indulge. The more
valuable the object or activity, the more the sacrifice is effective.
10.4.2 The purpose of harnessing addiction is that individual-interest
attachment to the object or action is hindering action for the whole interest The sufficiently
costly sacrifice, therefore, is offered to the whole interest, the
project. While the addiction remains, it
is now as if it had never been. Thus, the obstruction which we, as the object
partner with uncontrolled addiction, had presented to our subject partner has
been removed, and our subject partner may
welcome us, as the object partner with controlled addiction, back into the
project. (In Unificationism, such a process is called in English, misguidedly,
Restoration through Indemnity [2. Intro.1.1)
In Alcoholics Anonymous, the
“higher power” to which desirable alcoholic beverages are sacrificed actuaily
is the interest of the whole, namely, to get on with life.
10.4.3 Internally, if we are addicted to some thought,
such as a fantasy, or to some desire (e.g., for greater social power), putting
it aside may require attaching a painful action to it.
10.4.4 Any powerful selfish desire may
become addictive.This is notably, even universally, true of selfish sexual desire. Sexual desire always arises from the impulse
to give love to the greatest scope imagined. We may imagine a future
transformed reality with love and happiness. The may even imagine that there is
something greater, transcending what we can imagine, beckoning us on. Then, how
can sexual love best contribute to the coming of such a reality? This would be
in the production of an heir as a step in the scenario leading to an ideal
global civilization, which is the greatest interest of the whole. Therefore, a
sexual desire not accompanied by the intention of such production is inherently
selfish and, being powerful, becomes addictive. (Unificationism holds this
addiction to have been present in all people 1.[1.5] and that it can be
harnessed only through faith in a truly parental couple in the scenario,
sacramentally established, and by activity in accordance with guidance outlined
by the couple[1.7.4.2.]. Additional
rituals, include vows for sexual relations centered upon the transcendent and
rituals to overcome the resentment women harbor having been historically
oppressed.)
10.4.4.1 There is a two-fold reason why appropriate, unselfish desire is so
difficult to maintain. Unlike primates, such as the chimpanzees who can become
pregnant only several years apart, human beings can become pregnant every 10 or
11 months; upon becoming pregnant and delivering a baby, a human female must
devote several years to rearing the child, and for this she will not only optimally
have the support of her mate, but also have attained emotional maturity. Thus,
there is a multi-year gap between the age of acquiring the physiological
ability to reproduce, along with its appropriately developing hormones, and the
age for optimal reproduction. To deny for such a long period the natural urge
to reproduce, which would lead to a certain happiness, the interest of the
self, requires faith in a greater benefit in a far future, the interest of the
whole. To sustain such faith requires the utmost courage.
10.5
Suppose we give in to the temptation just to not seek to love more
greatly, fearing possible or even probable pain, but stay in our comfort zone? To do so would
be to imprison within our mind the impulse to give true love. All our actions
would be alienated from our deepest nature. Rather, to continue seeking
opportunity to give greater love will give us a new sense of freedom.
10.5.1
Even this heroic determination, however, would not itself establish the
internal freedom that we seek. The love that we give must be pure. […]
10.5.2 For the impulse to result in giving love, it
must become an emotion for loving. The emotion, guided by the operation of the
intellect, becomes the will to act in a specific way; then active love will occur
if a person has sufficient power. All too readily, however the impulse picks up
not just the emotion of loving, but one or more other emotions seeking
expression. It may pick up the desire to hurt someone in order to release
stored up feelings of resentment and revenge; in such a case, a kiss may be a
bite in disguise. The impulse to love may pick up the desire to be hurt as
punishment for actions considered guilty. It may take up sexual desire
inappropriate to the intended object of love. It may be affected or diverted by
an irrational desire-- a desire intellectually known to be impossible of
satisfaction--, which may result from extreme dissatisfaction or may be imbibed
from a parent. To be internally free, we must forgive any who have caused us pain
and forgive ourselves. In the case of irrational desire we will need to find a
cure in a therapy, such as……..??
SOCIETY
11. A project of any societal scope (e.g., marriage, a plan to
share enjoyable activity, a plan to benefit the neighborhood) purports that –
as in every project –actions for the whole interest will result in benefits for
the actor to some extent, and is an investment, with risk.
11.1 The family has been the basic unit of any
society […]. Societal relationships at any level may be seen as family
relationships writ large.
11.2 The expansion of a society, even one
that was not yet civilized, but definitely a civilized society that is able to
continue to thrive, has usually been dependent upon the example of a person demonstrating the viability of a
greater societal investment, a greater sacrifice involving a new technology –
often a series of such persons. If the example is remembered and societally
practiced, and it becomes a tradition, then, sooner or later, it is likely that
a political entity based upon the tradition will be established. The exemplary
person has had greater faith; and the greater his or her nobleness, the
sooner the societal practice will occur. (In Unificationism’s interpretation of
Genesis 4, the roles of the brothers – presumably, each with their families and
living with their parents – are seen as elder and younger, and this is a true
typology in a patriarchal culture in which the elder participates comfortably
in the father’s possessions, while the younger, with nothing to lose, is more
likely to innovate. Nevertheless, what the younger is doing in the story is to
sacrifice the availability of the animals as food before their maturity, while
the elder sacrifices the availability only of immature plants. Attachment is
stronger to that which is more valuable.)
[ A history of such expansion may be found implicit in the Hebrew
Scriptures culminating in the story of Solomon’s kingdom, a cautionary tale,
written by persons well after the destruction of the kingdom, it shows the
perils of deviating from the tradition.
Accepted history shows attempts to revive the tradition and move forward
with it. The Gospels of the Christian tradition may be seen to trace ultimately
unsuccessful attempts to establish a political entity enshrining an example and
the tradition that ensues from it.]
ACTION FOR SOCIETY
12. To act toward the
development of a society, or toward a reformation/transformation
of a society, we may either be the innovative person or seek and find and
assist one.
13. Societies, however, have needed
not only development but also purification, which should, or perhaps must,
precede the development. The purification that a society needs is the purging
of injustice.
14. Therefore, any of us who belong
to an oppressor class have the additional responsibility to seek to end the oppression in which we are complicit, not
only by repenting for it, not only in order to cleanse our feelings of guilt, but
also to facilitate opportunity for forgiveness among the oppressed. The facilitating actions are called reparations.
REPARATION
15. Any person can forgive another who hurt him or her, and this cleanses
the feelings of hurt and resentment, and also works towards harmony. However,
simple forgiveness is not benevolent: the offender is left with feelings of
guilt. Towards the removal of these, actions by the offender to repair historic
and current pain are called for. Yet, historic and current pain will likely be
too great to be fully repaired by the offender’s actions. If this is the case,
what may move the heart of the offended is for the offender to offer
reparations to the point of barely tolerable cost. This may also be accepted by
the offender’s conscience. Then, a fully harmonious relationship between the
two can be established. (In Unificationism, this process is called establishing
conditions toward indemnification.[2.1]
16. Forgiveness with recognition of
painful reparations may establish emotional harmony – reconciliation if the
parties had been in harmony before the offense –; however, the social situation may be one in which the offender can continue
to impose upon the offended. Therefore, the offending person or class--acting
towards the purpose of the whole, the full cooperation in a project for the
facilitation of greater loving, should set reparations and/or other means
towards the offended’s full external freedom and for equality, for only then
can the internal freedom of each – the freedom to give pure love in the realistic
expectation that it will be received-- be attained [1.2.5.1]. Only then will
there be peace, substantial harmony, and full happiness. (In Unificationism, the first offenders were
Adam and Eve, and the offended, God, who requested, for the sake of the
offenders, painfully costly reparations to expunge their guilty feelings.)
PART 1
Now I am going to write about this
text: You may, if you so wish, skip directly to the text by finding”1’
it is the current version of a post in my blog
johnnysonneborn.blogspot.com, “The Most Important Principles.” It has been
greatly developed since the previous posted version, and I do not expect to add
to it
[I will soon be posting several recently-written short
pieces.]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE MOST IMPORTANT PRINCIPLES
This post is my attempt to crystallize some standard teachings of
Unificationism, especially as written in Exposition of the Divine Principle,
also in New Explanation of Unification Thought, sometimes
elaborating/explicating, while suggesting new English terminology, (which
are underlined.)
in some cases. The framework is partner
theology/project theology.
The text is written from a humanist perspective so that it could be used
in all cultures, with a presenter tweaking according to the culture. [Since
I am sending this to you, I have inserted references to one or both of those
books. I am also informed by public talks by True Mother.] Although this
opening segment covers much of chapter 1, it is mostly about the chapter’s
section 2.1: Give-and Take Action, and I am hoping to receive critique. [In bracketed
references to EDP, the first number refers to the part of the book])
This first part begins with an assumption. On the foundation of the assumption, general
principles are given, putatively elucidating how the human mind thinks.
PART 2 will set forth principles relevant to our
common life riddled with pain.
ASSUMPTION
1. Every human being has the fundamental
irrepressible impulse to give love to the greatest scope imagined.[NEUT 3.II.A]
1.1.
Unlike other species, a human being’s imagination becomes unlimited
upon the person reaching adolescence.
HUMAN MATURATION
2. Each human
develops toward spiritual and physical maturity by the force inherent in the creation
principle.[EDP 1.1.2.3.1] This has also been called “innate intelligence”.
Within the creation principle, there are sub-principles, as follows.
3. Development
occurs through three stages: forming, growing, and completing. [1.1.5.2.1]
Jesus teaches an explication of these in Mark 4:26b-29.
3,1. Emotional growth occurs when love is given
and received, enabling giving of love to a greater social scope, longer
duration, and/or depth. (In Unificationism, the enabling is caused by new truth
given by God. [1.6,31).
3.1.1 Action,
above, is intended to benefit its recipient. Since the recipient’s fundamental
impulse is to give love, it follows that the loving action should enable the
recipient to love more greatly.
.
RELATIONSHIPS AND NETWORK
4. The existence of any entity can be described as one
or more four position foundations, which are networks of subject-object
relationships. [I.I.1.2.3-4]
5. A subject-object relationship exists in a
project and is established/formed as follows: [1.1.2.2] a would-be subject
partner advertises as such in a new project; another entity declares interest
in becoming an object partner and gives self-information, thus standing
symbolically in the object position; the subject partner expresses a desire for
the other to be a substantial object partner and states the processes and rules
for the project; the other expresses the desire to join the project as
described. (In Unificationism all
relations somehow occur “through the agency of the fundamental energy of God.”
[1.1.2.1-2]. Subject-object projects exist between human beings and within a
human being, and we may describe such interrelationships in the microworld.[1.1.1]
5.1 . Within a project, an
object-partner entity should obey any subject-partner’s directive that is in
accordance with the rules of the project: in the case of a project of human
beings, a person is always free to leave the project. (In a subproject of the
project HSA-UWC, even though the norm is always to obey, there is an
exception-- if a person thinks it likely that obeying the directive will result
in a catastrophe, he or she should write a message to the directive giver,
asking that person to send the message to that person’s subject partner,
requiring guidance.)
5 .2 .
An object partner is not passive. The partner offers information and may
offer suggestions. As offerer, the partner is in the subject position: giving
and responding, alternation of position, is continuous. [I.1.3.1.2] Yet, the subject partner ultimately
determines action, having` taken responsibility for the project and with a
greater awareness of the greater project within which the project is
itself a sub-project. (In Unification Theology, Heavenly Parent's project is
the all-encompassing one.)
5.3. There are types of subject-object partnerships. In one type, the subject partner has delegated to the object partner responsibility for part of the project (with the object partner thus poised to stand as the subject in a smaller project). The subject partner is then bound to unite with and support whatever the object partner says or does.
5.3.1 In another type, functioning according to the principle of dual purpose, the subject-partner is designated to pursue investment toward widening or deepening the project’s impact (purpose/interest of the whole); the object-partner, being responsible for maintaining the project and developing it (purpose/interest of the Individual), may warn the investing partner that the risk involved in that investing appears intolerable, yet cannot override it I think that the relationships in this horizontal form are ultimately ones of increase and decrease, with those in the other form ultimately ones of internal and external.
6. At least when
a project exists as a sub-project, it may be located in a diamond figure
quadruple base [1.1.4.3], as follows. At the diamond’s apex stands the greater
project; the narrower project’s subject partner and object partner stand at the
diamond’s sides; the fact of their union fills the remaining point. With this,
the occupant of any point may be seen in relation to that of any of the other
three points.
6.1
When a project is aiming for a specific effect, the purpose of the
effect, which is the project, stands at the apex of a temporary quadruple base,
with the result at the bottom: then the subject partner or object partner takes
the project into consideration when choosing actions. [NEUT I.2.A.] When
projects, described as quadruple bases, exist in a hierarchy of ever greater
projects, activity exists in a spiral [1.2.2.4].
7. In projects of persons (having
minds) a subject partner is always expressing love, and an object partner
returning beauty.
ETHICS
8. The fundamental ethical principle guiding
thinking beings is that of dual interests [1 1 3 1]: an action chosen toward fulfilling an
interest of the self (object) should be taken only if it is hoped that this
will enable the person better to contribute towards the interest of the whole project,
represented by the subject, who proposed
it, while actions taken for the fulfillment of the interest of the whole should
always respect the dignity of individuals affected by it and facilitate the
attainment of their self-interests. [This duality may be the creation principle
itself: building upon an existing foundation – developing while maintaining a foundation.]
9. God’s three blessings to each human being, told in Judaism’s creation myth[11.3.1], embody complexification and indicate that a perfectly mature human being takes the subject position toward any entity in the natural world or to any angel [1.1.5.2].
THE IDEAL
CONCLUSION. We can
imagine a reality in which all persons live/act according to these principles –
a world of lovingness and joyfulness [1.15.3.2][1.2.4.6][1.3.1.2]. However, reality
as we experience it is one of sorrow as well as happiness and can be analyzed
as featuring pain, Impatience, fear, anger, and conflict.
PART 2
In my explanation of
principles for painful reality, my goals of crystallizing Unificationism and writing
humanistically necessarily diverge. The reader interested only in the
principles derived from this reality can search for the suggested “origin” of
social and psychic pain, or for ”10” for the principles.
I will begin with an analysis of Unificationism’s corruption myth on the
foundation of its creation myths adopted, interpreted, and adapted from
Judaism's.[For a humanistic telling of this legend, find “Restatement”]
Almost all cultures that survive have
such a mythology that implicitly contain norms for social relations and for
individual behavior. The norms almost always support the stability of family
life, thus promoting the culture’s survival. Judaism's also greatly values the
lives of individuals. Judaism's core mythology was spread by Jews, Christians,
and Muslims to most of the world. It was in cultures developed from this that
productive industry was created. In
modern times, some of these cultures or sub- cultures abandoned the mythology,
while keeping the valuation of individual lives.
[1..3] It is not unreasonable to
think that the ancestors of all human beings living even before the arrival of
civilization (other ancestral lines having died out) were twins, having evolved
from a previous species in an opportune environment. During childhood the boy
and girl separated from the maternal species and formed a project whose goal
was the full maturation of each. They exchanged love and beauty, helped each
other, and exercised their creativity in exploring the environment. The girl,
intuitively preparing for motherhood, was more protective of foundations they
had developed. The boy, intuitively preparing for developing the foundations,
was more adventuresome.
[1.3.1]. In Unificationism, which interprets Genesis
3, they are Adam and Eve.
The fruit equals Eve’s love. Its tree equals
Eve. Ev[JN1] [JN2] e’s
eating the fruit equals making her love one with her. It is also described as
consummating her love.[1.2 4] The tree of life equals a perfectly mature human
being; in its first mention, Adam.[1.2.1] This, combined with God’s statement
that if the humans ate from the tree of life, they would live forever [1.2.1], and with one of the reasons that God did not
act to stop the Fall, indicate that if he had, humans would have remained in an
immature state, having their love become one with them prematurely.[1.2.6.3]. The serpent equals the archangel Lucifer [1.2],
created as the children’s servant and teacher and as the channel of God’s love
to other angels.[1.2.2.1]
[1.2.2.1] Lucifer, recognizing that God’s love for the
children was immensely greater than that for him, naturally felt envy. This
developed into jealousy of Adam to the point where he considered trying to
replace him as the central channel of God’s love. It is not clear why he decided to dominate
Eve, other than that Genesis says so (its purpose being to lead to Genesis 4,
in which, Eve refuses to take responsibility for her action and is cursed with
her desire being toward Adam).
[1.2.2.1.]
On a fateful day, when Eve had matured to the top of the growing stage,
the archangel proposed to her a project for the consummation of her love, with
himself standing in the subject-partner position, and Eve, naturally respecting
the angel, responded with interest in such consummation. Thus, through the
agency of the Universal Prime Energy, the two formed a reciprocal base. The
angel then began to outline the steps to be taken and desirable consequences.
At this point, the force inherent in the Principle that had been endowed to Eve
by God to guide her maturation and through which God would govern her during
her immaturity (growing being intrinsically autonomous) pushed her to pause,
and this was manifested in her original mind and in the formation of her
conscience. There were two reasons for this: according to the creation
principle, it was one of the kinds of activities that were meant to be shared;
it was meant to be performed when she had become more mature emotionally and
able to imagine the thoughts and feelings of her twin. Eve expressed reluctance to the angel, and he
responded with counter arguments. Eve, immature in intellect, not yet stable
emotionally and already beginning to feel horizontal love for the angel, abandoned
her faith in the internal guidance and its warning, and greedily responded, and
the two established a common base and began give-and-take action. Eve, becoming
enraptured by the Archangel’s proposal, her developing self-interest desire to
consummate her love ignoring the interest for the whole --her sibling
relationship with Adam--increasingly felt foreboding. Eventually, her love for
the activity, self love, overrode the power of her innate intelligence, and she
became unable to stop, as also did the archangel, and impulsively they became
one.
The angel felt dread, having abandoned faith
that God would eventually fulfill all his desires. [1.2.2.1] Eve, in their
oneness, received the dread from the angel.
He came to be called Satan [1.2] because of his mind
to accuse God and to accuse Adam.[1.2.3]
[1.2.2.2]
Eve, having abandoned the project
she shared with Adam for the archangel’s, tried to reenter it based on her
feeling of fear and to undo the cause of her painful guilty conscience. Having
learned clearly about sexual intercourse, Eve proposed to Adam what was, in
fact, a new project, in which she would stand as the subject partner. Adam,
seeing Eve in the confused state and having abandoned their project, was
weakened and, after not so much hesitation that was prompted by his principled
force and conscience, readily entered into reciprocal relationship and then
formed a common base with Eve. The ensuing giving and receiving action then propelled
them into substantial sexual intercourse. The Archangel thus came to dominate
not only Eve but also, through her, Adam and, through them the natural world.
Unificationism gives among God’s
reasons for refraining from intervening in these tragic developments, respect
for the dignity of the humans who had been given free will responsibility to
grow according to the creation principle [1.2.6.1], and refusal to accept their denying growth to the
completing stage, which would have prevented the realization of the ideal for
each to become perfectly mature, [1.2.6.2] symbolized by the tree of life.
The boy and girl, each refusing to accept responsibility for
their selfish actions, could not relate in full harmony. When they finally did
beget children, their internal confusion and their disharmony affected even
their reproductive process as well as the nature of their parenting.
Human beings, conceived and growing up in
such circumstances, descendants of the couple whose choice to follow the
selfish will overrode the force inherent in the creation principle, having
inherited dread, guilt, and fear, have been continuingly tempted to act in
violation of the principle of dual interests[1.2], even though many
display altruistic behavior as early as the second year of life.
Restatement
In order to restate from
a humanist perspective Unificationism’s corruption myth on the foundation of
its creation myths, I first note that the effectiveness of such a myth lies in its
offer of guidance for the lives of the people. This is possible because the
components of the myth symbolically refer to features of the natural order. The
task here, then, is to demythologize the unnatural components of these tales as
finally written in Genesis 3 and 4., to find secular references for God, and for the archangel and interactions among God, the archangel,
and the two humans.
It is easier to unmask the
Archangel Angels know laws and principles of created
reality. They pass on this knowledge to other existing entities, thus
supporting the maintenance of the entities. As maintainer, the Archangel is
supporting the interests of the self. (in Unificationism, for each feature of
created reality, there is a feature within each human being that relates to it
[1.6.2.]; thus the feature relating to angels, could be self-interest.)
It would be more difficult to restate
relationship with other angels, unmasking its meaning….. Perhaps a hierarchy of
self interests.
In Judaism’s corruption myth, a penalty for the woman’s
refusal to take any responsibility for having been seduced is that her
“desire will be for the man”.(Gen 3:16b)
This desire, with its implicit mental dependency, becomes addictive.
God, for reasons given
above, does not appear in this first stage of Unificationism’s interpretation
of Judaism’s corruption myth. God appears in Unificationism’s recounting of Genesis 3:16b, in which, after the
children refuse to take responsibility for their actions, God, first pronounces penalty consequences,
and then gives them clothing. This is the first step in God’s guiding and helping
human beings to regain freedom and recover and gain intimacy with Him.
[1.5.2.2] In Unification theology,
God does not directly govern immature human beings. God endowed each human with
the irrepressible desire to give love to the greatest scope imagined. God then
governs human beings through the force inherent in the Creation Principle. That
when a human being, guided by the force, has given love and had the love
received, becomes ready to give love to a greater scope, is attributed to God’s
giving him or her more truth and love. [1.6.3.2] However, internal truth and
external truth are properties of a human being, and the impulse of giving true
love is ready to manifest itself in a person’s emotions given the reception of
beauty and the recognition of a new level of opportunity. Accordingly, having
stated the impulse at the start of this text, I will restate the myths
substituting simply the principled force in place of God, calling it, as I have
above, innate intelligence.
The origin of
painful reality.
It is not unreasonable to think that the
ancestors of all human beings living even before the arrival of civilization
(other ancestral lines having died out) were twins,(in Unificationism, they
were the boy Adam and the girl Eve ( [1.1.1] having evolved from a previous
species in an opportune environment
Garden of Eden[1.1.1]. ( In Unificationism, they were just created by
God [1.1.1] During childhood the boy
and girl separated from the maternal species and formed a project whose goal
was the full maturation of each [1.1.1.1]. They exchanged love and beauty,
helped each other, and exercised their creativity in exploring the environment.
As they physically matured, they were able to give love to each other at
increasing depths, and so were growing spiritually/emotionally as
well.[1.6.1.2] The girl, intuitively preparing for motherhood, was more
protective of foundations they had
developed. The boy, intuitively preparing for developing the foundations, was
more adventuresome.
On a fateful day in their adolescence, the girl, alone, thought of an
activity that seemed as if it would be pleasurable. (In Unificationism, the
thought is suggested by the Archangel Lucifer.[1.2.2.1]) [1.2.2.1]She
considered it positively and soon began engaging in it. Soon her innate
intelligence, manifesting in her conscience, impelled her to pause and examine
it in relation to the project, the interest of the whole. There were two
reasons for this: according to the creation principle, it was one of the kind
of activities that were meant to be shared; it was meant to be performed when
she had become more mature emotionally and able to imagine the thoughts and
feelings of her twin.[1.1.3.3 This caused her to reflect; however, at that age
of growth, her intellect was not sufficiently developed to be sure if this
self-interest activity was appropriate for the project. [1.2.5.3] However the girl, immature in
intellect and not get stable emotionally and already beginning to feel love for
the activity, abandoned her faith in the internal guidance and its warning, and
greedily continued in the activity. Eventually, her love for the activity overrode the power of her innate
intelligence, and she became unable to stop[1.2.5.1] until exhausted.
[1.2.2.2].Now alone emotionally as well as physically, the girl felt
dread. Having abandoned the project she shared with her twin, feeling pain from
her conscience and, being alone and separated from any interest of the whole,
she also felt fear.
[1.2.2.1] As the girl now had come to know clearly, what she had only
dimly sensed, the outcome of the activity, she proposed to the boy sharing the activity in
an attempt to reenter their project, but what would be, in fact, a new project,
in which she would stand as the subject partner. He, seeing her in the confused
state and having abandoned their project, was weakened and, after not so much
hesitation that was prompted by his principled force and conscience, readily
entered into a reciprocal relationship
and then formed a common base with her . The ensuing giving and receiving
action then propelled them into sexual intercourse.[1.2.2.2]
Their new project was not the maturation of each, but
the satisfaction of each centered on each one’s selfish desire.
RESPONSIBILITY
10. in our painful reality, the
innately urged responsibility of each of us to grow to emotional and physical maturity
is difficult, if not impossible to fulfill, for the following reasons.
10.1 In early childhood, each of us acquires from
our caretaker(s) the inclination to overvalue the purpose of the self, and so
shy from acting towards the whole interest: this inclination exists along with
the natural inclination for altruistic behavior.
10.2 Each of us exists as an object partner in one
or more projects. We entered a project at the invitation of the would-be
subject partner, who assured us that developmental action would also benefit
us, either immediately or in due time, In accordance with the principle of dual
interests. Each of us also exists with
unnatural fearfulness, also acquired from the caretaker. This is not a natural
fear appropriate to our being a human, such as the fear of a newborn upon
feeling the strength of the force of gravity and sensing distance from a solid,
nor instructed or experienced fear such of
touching something too hot. Accordingly, we experience fear when
developmental action is about to be undertaken, fear that we will be depleted
without due compensation. In the normal
development of a project, this fear is overcome by our well-grounded faith in
the subject partner. However, when, impelled by our fundamental impulse to give
love more greatly, action is contemplated to give love to another person
stimulating the receiver to pass on the love, fear is heightened . Love offered
to another is an investment entailing risk. If our offer is received, we and
the receiver unite as an expanded project more able also to benefit ourselves.
However, we know that the receiver may (for reasons that I will soon mention)
refuse to, in turn, love more greatly, so that unity will not occur and we are
left with depletion of our resources. Overcoming our fearfulness is faith in
the project's plan, ultimately in the subject partner, and belief that the
subject partner participates in projects ultimately stemming from
person{s} of solid goodness. This means that we require courage to have faith
in our subject partner, and, If the fear is too great, we are strongly tempted to
act instead for our own benefit, either to hoard resources or to aggressively
seek acquisition, in both cases fearing future insufficiency, exercising our freedom to leave the project and
embark on our own. It is because we know our own temptability that we know that
the intended receiver of our offer of love will be tempted to refuse it and may
succumb.
10.3 Further, if our offer of love is rejected,
our will to love is strengthened, but there has been no return of beauty
encouraging giving to a greater scope. Instead, of feeling joy, we, deprived of
the object of love, will feel sorrow, the intensity depending upon the depth of
our lovingness.
10.3.1
Fortunately, running beneath a potential rejecter’s inclination to
overvalue an object of self interest and his or her fearfulness is his or her
fundamental impulse to love more greatly. Considering this should lessen our
own fearfulness, and we may gratefully appreciate it.
10.4
An additional cause of not acting upon a desire to further the interests
of the whole is uncontrolled addiction. Common addictions include addiction to the effect of
alcoholic beverages, of narcotics, and of satisfaction of sexual desire. In
general, while any pleasurable activity may be intrinsically good, one should
avoid over indulging in any, lest strong attachment to the expected pleasure
make it difficult to act for the purpose of the whole. We may consider fearful attachment to a food
source, to the well-being of one’s family excluding activity for the sake of
the community, of one’s community excluding the sake of the nation, and one’s
nation excluding the sake of the world also to be forms of addiction.
10.4,1
Ritual sacrifice is a method for harnessing addiction. Symbolically or
actually, the next object or action to which we are attached is placed where we
cannot access it. Then, when contemplating any such object or action, we
remember that we had sacrificed the next one, putting it away, and so are
extremely reluctant to indulge. The more
valuable the object or activity, the more the sacrifice is effective.
10.4.2
The purpose of harnessing addiction is that individual-interest
attachment to the object or action is hindering action for the whole interest The sufficiently
costly sacrifice, therefore, is offered to the whole interest, the
project. While the addiction remains, it
is now as if it had never been. Thus, the obstruction which we, as the object
partner with uncontrolled addiction, had presented to our subject partner has
been removed, and our subject partner may
welcome us, as the object partner with controlled addiction, back into the
project. (In Unificationism, such a process is called in English, misguidedly,
Restoration through Indemnity [2. Intro.1.1)
In Alcoholics Anonymous, the
“higher power” to which desirable alcoholic beverages are sacrificed actuaily
is the interest of the whole, namely, to get on with life.
10.4.2 Internally, if we are addicted to some thought,
such as a fantasy, or to some desire (e.g., for greater social power), putting
it aside may require attaching a painful action to it.
10.4.3 Any powerful selfish desire may
become addictive.This is notably, even universally, true of selfish sexual desire. Sexual desire always arises from the impulse
to give love to the greatest scope imagined. We may imagine a future
transformed reality with love and happiness. The may even imagine that there is
something greater, transcending what we can imagine, beckoning us on. Then, how
can sexual love best contribute to the coming of such a reality? This would be
in the production of an heir as a step in the scenario leading to an ideal
global civilization, which is the greatest interest of the whole. Therefore, a
sexual desire not accompanied by the intention of such production is inherently
selfish and, being powerful, becomes addictive. (Unificationism holds this
addiction to have been present in all people 1.[1.5] and that it can be
harnessed only through faith in a truly parental couple in the scenario,
sacramentally established, and by activity in accordance with guidance outlined
by the couple[1.7.4.2.]. Additional
rituals, include vows for sexual relations centered upon the transcendent and
rituals to overcome the resentment women harbor having been historically
oppressed.)
10.4.3.1 There is a two-fold reason why appropriate, unselfish desire is so
difficult to maintain. Unlike primates, such as the chimpanzees who can become
pregnant only several years apart, human beings can become pregnant every 10 or
11 months; upon becoming pregnant and delivering a baby, a human female must
devote several years to rearing the child, and for this she will not only optimally
have the support of her mate, but also have attained emotional maturity. Thus,
there is a multi-year gap between the age of acquiring the physiological
ability to reproduce, along with its appropriately developing hormones, and the
age for optimal reproduction. To deny for such a long period the natural urge
to reproduce, which would lead to a certain happiness, the interest of the self,
requires faith in a greater benefit in a far future, the interest of the whole.
To sustain such faith requires the utmost courage.
10.5.1 Even this heroic
determination, however, would not itself establish the internal freedom that we
seek. The love that we give must be pure.
10.5.2 For the impulse to result in giving love, it
must become an emotion for loving. The emotion, guided by the operation of the
intellect, becomes the will to act in a specific way; then active love will occur
if a person has sufficient power. All too readily, however the impulse picks up
not just the emotion of loving, but one or more other emotions seeking
expression. It may pick up the desire to hurt someone in order to release
stored up feelings of resentment and revenge; in such a case, a kiss may be a
bite in disguise. The impulse to love may pick up the desire to be hurt as
punishment for actions considered guilty. It may take up sexual desire
inappropriate to the intended object of love. It may be affected or diverted by
an irrational desire-- a desire intellectually known to be impossible of
satisfaction--, which may result from extreme dissatisfaction or may be imbibed
from a parent. To be internally free, we must forgive any who have caused us
pain and forgive ourselves. In the case of irrational desire we will need to
find a cure in a therapy.
SOCIETY
11. A project of any societal scope (e.g., marriage, a plan to
share enjoyable activity, a plan to benefit the neighborhood) purports that –
as in every project –actions for the whole interest will result in benefits for
the actor to some extent, and is an investment, with risk.
11.1 The family has been the basic unit of any
society […]. Societal relationships at any level may be seen as family
relationships writ large.
11.2 The expansion of a society, even one
that was not yet civilized, but definitely a civilized society that is able to
continue to thrive, has usually been dependent upon the example of a person demonstrating the viability of a greater
societal investment, a greater sacrifice involving a new technology – often a
series of such persons. If the example is remembered and societally practiced,
and it becomes a tradition, then, sooner or later, it is likely that a
political entity based upon the tradition will be established. The exemplary
person has had greater faith; and the greater his or her nobleness, the
sooner the societal practice will occur. (In Unificationism’s interpretation of
Genesis 4, the roles of the brothers – presumably, each with their families and
living with their parents – are seen as elder and younger, and this is a true
typology in a patriarchal culture in which the elder participates comfortably
in the father’s possessions, while the younger, with nothing to lose, is more
likely to innovate. Nevertheless, what the younger is doing in the story is to
sacrifice the availability of the animals as food before their maturity, while
the elder sacrifices the availability only of immature plants. Attachment is
stronger to that which is more valuable.)
[ A history of such expansion may be found implicit in the Hebrew
Scriptures culminating in the story of Solomon’s kingdom, a cautionary tale,
written by persons well after the destruction of the kingdom, it shows the
perils of deviating from the tradition.
Accepted history shows attempts to revive the tradition and move forward
with it. The Gospels of the Christian tradition may be seen to trace ultimately
unsuccessful attempts to establish a political entity enshrining an example and
the tradition that ensues from it.]
ACTION FOR SOCIETY
12. To act toward the
development of a society, or toward a reformation/transformation
of a society, we may either be the innovative person or seek and find and
assist one.
13. Societies, however, have needed
not only development but also purification, which should, or perhaps must,
precede the development. The purification that a society needs is the purging
of injustice.
14. Therefore, any of us who belong
to an oppressor class have the additional responsibility to seek to end the oppression in which we are complicit, not
only by repenting for it, not only in order to cleanse our feelings of guilt, but
also to facilitate opportunity for forgiveness among the oppressed. The facilitating actions are called reparations.
REPARATION
15. Any person can forgive another who hurt him or her, and this cleanses
the feelings of hurt and resentment, and also works towards harmony. However,
simple forgiveness is not benevolent: the offender is left with feelings of
guilt. Towards the removal of these, actions by the offender to repair historic
and current pain are called for. Yet, historic and current pain will likely be
too great to be fully repaired by the offender’s actions. If this is the case,
what may move the heart of the offended is for the offender to offer
reparations to the point of barely tolerable cost. This may also be accepted by
the offender’s conscience. Then, a fully harmonious relationship between the
two can be established.
16. Forgiveness with recognition of
painful reparations may establish emotional harmony – reconciliation if the
parties had been in harmony before the offense –; however, the social situation may be one in which the offender can continue
to impose upon the offended. Therefore, the offending person or class--acting
towards the purpose of the whole, the full cooperation in a project for the
facilitation of greater loving, should set reparations and/or other means
towards the offended’s full external freedom and for equality, for only then
can the internal freedom of each – the freedom to give pure love in the realistic
expectation that it will be received-- be attained [1.2.5.1]. Only then will
there be peace, substantial harmony, and full happiness. (In Unificationism, the first offenders were
Adam and Eve, and the offended, God, who requested, for the sake of the
offenders, painfully costly reparations to expunge their guilty feelings.)