Neutral Universe?
The Universe would not exist, if we humans weren’t here to be conscious of it. Think of this. There is a whole Universe out there, but it could not have any meaning, unless we, humans, give it meaning …
A quotation from an African writer: “ (…) in the Cosmic sense, there is no good or bad. There is only the undulating motion of being. Good and bad are human concepts. They are labels that we assign to things which please or displease us”.
However, five paragraphs down in his presentation all of a sudden this same writer says: “The good must always ultimately win”.
A clear contradiction, or is it?
We point to this apparent contradiction, not to downplay the importance of this writer’s presentation. On the contrary, he is saying what we try to convey in the title of this article. It is a paradox. In the Universe there is always Balance. Every action has an equal reaction. In the Spiritual Realm this is also the case. Cosmic Balance, therefore, is a neutral force which keeps it all together.
So this Cosmic Balance is the basic Law of the Universe. And it stands to reason that IF we humans should choose to create and maintain civilization, it must submit to this neutral force, neither good nor evil. For we cannot break Cosmic Law. In legalese this is called ‘Natural Law’. We cannot break that.
But why should we want to create and maintain civilization? Does the wish not imply compassion? And does the word ‘create’ not imply a creative impulse? So we may conclude that civilization rests on compassion and creativity. We might call this ‘human justice’.
But then we are confronted again with this same contradiction between the neutral force of Cosmic Balance and the compassionate/creative human justice which keeps civilization together. How to solve this paradox?
Presumption
We escape by ‘presumption’. In the opening lines of this article it was stated that the Universe has no meaning, unless we humans give it meaning. Quite presumptuous! Applying this same kind of presumption we may choose to make the Universe compassionate and creative.
But is that really presumptuous, or is a different purpose served? Consider this. If the Universe was not creative, it could not have created itself. We may not understand it and it is certainly different from our notions of it. But it is there. And we did not create it.
And if the Universe was not compassionate, why else would it have created ITself? Practicing compassion in our effort to create and maintain civilization, we notice that a compassionate vibration is already present in the Universe. As a matter of fact, it has been there long before humans even existed and began to dream of creating civilization.
So humans can really do no more than resonate with Cosmic Compassion and Creativity. The presumption lies in our belief that we can make the Universe compassionate. But it is precisely this presumption that will bring us into contact with the pre-existing Cosmic Compassion and Creativity. This is an application of the saying: ‘As above, so below’.
This reminds us of the alleged Buddhist initiatory promise: “Countless are the Beings. I promise to save them all”. We cannot possibly save them all. Quite presumptuous! But the wish expressed in the promise will make us compassionate, which in its turn will make us resonate with Cosmic Compassion. And ultimately also with Cosmic Creativity.
And in a way the presumption is not all that presumptuous either, because if we were not here, the Cosmic compassionate creativity could not resonate. This only goes to show that we humans do occupy an indispensable place. Not something to become cocky about, but rather a point to persuade us to accept responsibility for co-creating a compassionate civilization.
Compassion is the essence of the ‘constructive nature’ of the Cosmic, as our African writer expresses it. Compassion is there beyond the ‘neutral’ Cosmic Balance. It inspires and propels the Cosmic forward. It is the Cosmic’s driving force, or inward capacity for Self-direction. And by applying it in the human sense, we start resonating with it in the spiritual sense.
Can we prove any of this? No. But the thought inspires and is hopeful. It provides direction and gives meaning to the Universe and to civilization. And we can make the thought true. We can literally build it in the Temple not made by hands.
Justice instead of Balance
Based on the foregoing, we prefer the word ‘Justice’ to ‘Cosmic Balance’. In our everyday use of the word ‘Justice’ we mean more than neutral Karma. When we argue about a ‘just cause’ or about ‘justice’ in the legal sense, we do not mean a cold ‘balancing out’ of constructive and destructive forces, which we acknowledge are there. We mean something more. We express that we want this balancing out to be compassionate. And also forgiving, when at all possible.
That is why ‘Justice’ in this sense is the highest human aspiration. The word includes the concepts of Compassion and Creativity, transcending neutral Cosmic Balance. So when Justice is applied in a Court of law, ideally the verdict comprises compassion and creativity, as well as balanced karma. And if the Court consciously applies Justice in this way, it will increasingly resonate with Cosmic Compassion and Creativity.
We see this symbolized in the well-known image of the ‘Scales of Justice’. Notice how the scales rest on either side of a stand or support. The scales will always balance out, in accordance with physical and karmic law. But without the support, the scales would be useless. In other words, the functioning of the scales is totally dependent on the existence of the support with its cross-bar. This makes the support and cross-bar a fit symbol of Cosmic Compassion and Creativity, whereas the 2 scales represent the two opposites of good and evil, construction and destruction balancing out in neutral Cosmic Balance.
Thus the Egyptian Tau-cross, formed by the support and cross-bar, represents the third principle, or third dimension if you will, the force between Good and Evil, Reward and Punishment, centrifugal and centripetal, the precise Middle where there is complete Rest and Stillness, but at the same time the most intense tension. This point of rest/tension (and progression) we call Justice, or Ma’at. It is not ‘neutral’. It is conscious, compassionate and creative.
And if it is not, we will make it so!
The judiciary’s proper role
This symbolism applied to the creation and maintenance of civilization leads to the conclusion that the Courts hold an important instrument for co-creation, i.e. the power to co-create by applying creative compassion. We all can (learn to) co-create this way in our daily lives. BUT the Judicial Power wielded by the Courts gives them an important tool for guiding society to more compassion and creativity, if they should choose to apply it in this way.
At present Courts usually do NOT apply the tool in this way. The current thinking is that the Courts should hold back, because they lack legitimacy for guiding society. Judges are not politicians. And usually they are not democratically elected into office. Therefore they generally refuse to take a stand in so-called ‘political cases’ and even in non-political cases in which important societal principles have to be determined.
But ‘neutrality’ does not exist for Courts either. Pontius Pilate was neutral and we all know how that ended. NOBODY is neutral. We can choose inaction instead of action, silence instead of speaking and sometimes this is imperative. But it does not make us neutral. For to a smaller or greater degree we all influence others and contribute towards guiding or destroying society by action and inaction.
It therefore behooves us all to think about and make transparent in what direction we would like society to evolve. We must paint a picture of the ideal end-goal making sure it resonates with Justice (Ma’at) and remains attainable by human beings. And because the Courts wield enormous power they should be the first to do so.
If the Courts meditate upon and attune to that point of complete rest and at the same time intense action, where there is compassion and creativity (and the inner cause of progression), their verdicts will be increasingly compassionate and creative, which may guide society progressively and effectively towards where it should go.
So where then should it go? What does the ideal society look like? The goal should be clearly and transparently stated, keeping in mind that the ‘end-goal’ will always recede.
First attempts
To a certain degree this ‘end-goal’ was enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As the groundwork for the description of an ideal society, or shall we say ‘civilization’, it was a great achievement. It should have been practiced more actively than has been the case during the past 70 years. As the Supreme Court of India has noted, Human Rights should not forever remain a ‘teasing illusion’.
On the other hand we should not forget that rights imply responsibilities, whereas the problem posed by conflicting human rights should be solved. So although the Declaration does pose certain problems, it remains an anchor-point. Its prime consideration that the inherent dignity and equal rights of all people is the basis for freedom, justice and peace, remains as true as ever.
As a matter of fact, our disregard for this prime consideration is one of the reasons why we are passing through such troubling times at the moment.
Justice as Method
But the Declaration is only a set of first principles. It does not paint a clear picture of the ideal society. And if we should wish to work towards civilization (i.e. the ideal society), we should not only hold a clear picture of it in our minds, we should also devise a method to get there.
People generally believe that politics is the method to get there. It is not. Politics does serve its purpose. Laws have to be drawn up and executed. Society must be made to function orderly. However, politics is not and cannot be the driving force behind the progressive evolution of society towards an (ever-receding) ideal. Especially not in a democracy.
We do not suggest scrapping democracy. On the contrary. We defend and cherish it. But one should not expect of democratic politics what it cannot give. Politics is limited to the dual constructive and destructive forces of Cosmic Balance. It is limited to Karma. It does not do Justice. That is the domain assigned to the Judiciary.
So what should be done?
The truth is not hard to see now. In a democratic society it is the Judiciary that holds the keys that may unlock the doors to the ideal society. Especially during these troubling times it is plain to see that the Ship of State is completely rudderless if guided exclusively by the dual forces of the Legislature and Executive without the compassionate input of the Judiciary. So much so that the State is now even suppressing freedom whilst upholding unbearable inequalities globally. And even in the richer countries the less fortunate are beset by severe hardships. It is these iniquities that are causing the current global instabilities and wars.
As the function of the Courts is to do Justice, THEY should take up the challenge to guide society towards the Light (i.e. real civilization). The Courts should be persuaded to provide direction by passing compassionate and creative verdicts. The word ‘verdict’ means ‘truth dictate’. Only the Courts have the power to pass such dictates, which even the other two state powers are by law obliged to adhere to.
This understanding has triggered the writing of a small booklet (don’t be alarmed, no more than 33 pages with many illustrative pictures), entitled ‘Paradigm Regained’. It outlines how the New Paradigm may gradually and peacefully be (re)gained by engaging and encouraging a more active and compassionate Judiciary. Anybody interested may read it at www.arcocarib.com
Conclusion
The following versicle epitomizes our plea. We hope it may inspire:
Traversing Justice we reach the point
where Cosmic Balance is joint
and Creativity lives.
In this point there are no bounds,
there are no sounds
where God Compassion gives.
M. Bijkerk (adapted for GMS)
Bonaire, 1 May 2016