{Quality relationships (3): Dynamic Independence}[16th April 1987]

[Redbook3:196-202][19870416:1730]{Quality relationships (3): Dynamic Independence}[16th April 1987]

19870416.1730

I have discussed* what appears to be the approach to the Absolute Truth through Inner Qualities. However, the question arises: what are these Qualities? They have been described as having Objective Reality (i.e. existence independent of the particular observer) and having the Quality** of Absolute Truth (i.e. there can be no possible doubt, once such a quality is identified, that it exists: a quality not shared by any external phenomenon). However, there may be internal “phenomena” which seem to satisfy these conditions but which do not appear, by intuition, necessarily to be Qualities through which one would expect to be able to approach the Absolute Truth***. Hatred is one: if Love is such a Quality, why not hatred?****

I think that I can distinguish the two in terms of classes; but I am not sure I can do so entirely within the terms of the two conditions so far identified (and this may have implications requiring revision or supplementation of the discussion of Belief and Knowledge#). Basically, I suspect that while Innocence (for example) is a Quality, hatred is merely an emotion. What this means (or suggests) is that hatred is the creation of the Individual himself, whereas Innocence is not. Certainly hatred seems to be impossible without the Self, whereas Innocence shines more clearly without the Self. This suggests that hatred has to do more with Outer Circle, and Innocence with Inner Circle, degrees.

But is not Love also an emotion? As a matter of fact, no, I do not think that it is. When distorted by the Self, what the Self thinks is love may well seem to be an emotion; but true Love, the Love that has detachment, is something that arises independent of the Self and attaches to the Individual, like the Quality of Innocence – or the Quality of Truth.

But what about Anger – for example, Righteous Anger? Well, I do not know whether Righteous Anger is really a valid concept, but I think that Anger is either an emotion or an even more controlled state of mind.#*

*(ref. [[Redbook3:184-193][19870414:1003](BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE (2))[14th April 1987]] 184-193)

*{ref. [[Redbook3:147-150][19870409:1345](QUALITY RELATIONSHIPS{1})[9th April 1987] &

[Redbook3:156][19870409:1345l](QUALITY RELATIONSHIPS(2))[9th April 1987 p.] 156}

**[See [Redbook3:169-172][19870411:2200]{Archetypes and Qualities(1)}[11th April 1987], final sentence, for what is meant by Qualities “having” the Quality of Absolute Truth.]

***(i.e. as God)

****(Pain is a sensation, not a Quality: probably a form of sense input from Touch. Pleasure is almost certainly a response to chemical processes, or else too broad a description to be analysed. I do not think that either of these are States of Mind: Processes of Brain, maybe.)

#{Oh no, not again!}

#*{cf. IV.3,13,40.}

#*controlled? /=dependent <891001>

[continues]

[PostedBlogger10052016]