|
"And where that this amazing development end in Leah's story? How did it end for Leah?" I asked.
"It ended in tragedy, Peter. A high-level scientific position is hard to hold on to. You of all people should know this. I heard the professor telling you that America had once the most advanced scientific system of economics ever created, built on proudest achievements in the development of mankind, the crowning legacy of the genius of humanity spanning the ages. America was built on leading-edge science. Unfortunately America didn't remain living at the leading edge itself. It turned its back to it and let it all go. That's what happened to Leah. The regression began slowly. With the birth of Zilpah's second son she said, I am happy, I feel so blessed. She named the child Asher, which means the same thing. My friend commented on her happiness in the welfare of the whole, which she knew she had indirectly enabled and encouraged, calling that happiness a type of spiritual compensation. That sort of thing is hard to hold onto, Peter. Then, suddenly, a black cloud appeared over this happiness. Leah's first son had found mandrakes in the field that were deemed to aid conception. With them Leah was able to bear children once more. Unfortunately this also got her back into the old environment again, of envy, conflicts, and manipulation. She ended her life on the same platform of bitterness that she started out with, still trying to manipulate Jacob into loving her. She called her sixth child Zebulum, saying: 'now will my husband dwell with me, because I have given him six sons.' If only she could have held onto her high self-esteem that was reflected in Gad."
"I know," I said and nodded. "We should have done the same thing in America. We have let go of the brightest we had and joined the empire in its war against our own country and the empire is winning, mostly by our own hands. That's what the professor said. He called me a traitor."
"That is why its important for you to discover the science of love," Helen interrupted me.
She told me that the concern I raised against my being in bed with her has also had another important aspect standing behind it, that of popular opinion versus the truth. "It's a facet of the same war," she said. She told me that popular opinion dictates that I shouldn't be in bed with her, not being married to her, while the Principle of Universal Love points in the opposite direction. "Do popular opinion or universal principles represent the truth?" she asked. She answered that question herself, with a paradox.
"Consider the idea of democracy," she said. "A democracy without constitutional principles is formally a type of government that is controlled by popular opinion. It reflects popular opinion and empowers popular opinion. The process and the outcome have nothing to do with the truth about anything. It empowers the cupidity of small-minded thinking. It contains no element that invariably ennobles society with truthful perceptions. In fact, it often prevents them. That is why we have constitutions created that establish some minimal standards based on discovered universal principles that are acknowledged as paramount, which limit the arbitration of opinions and make the democratic process workable. The act like firewalls against empire. Unfortunately, their principles don't mean anything without the scientific foundation in society's thinking that makes the imperative. The dynamism for good lies in ideas, and those are typically powered by love.
"I have invited you here tonight to help you to understand and acknowledge the idea and the dynamism of a long-ignored universal principle that is a vital element of truth pertaining to our humanity, namely that we are all primarily human beings with universal human needs, and strengths, and profound qualities as human beings," she said. "That's crucial in the world today. Our already established unity in truth should stand as our universal constitution that should never be violated. Everything else is secondary and needs to be built around it, and reflect it, such as our universal love for our humanity. But that's not a easy idea to take hold of and to experience its dynamism. Popular opinion should never rule over that idea and it unfolding, but be channeled by the science that underlies our basic principles that have been discovered to enrich and brighten our existence to the greatest possible extent. Our love for one-another as human beings reflects a universal principle, Peter, which we can't get away from. I like to call it the Principle of Universal Love. But we got to live the idea that it represents. That is why you are here, Peter. That is what you are already responding to. Public opinion says that this is treachery. Your heart and soul tells you that it isn't. That's a paradox, right? So, what should your response be? Should you respond to the universal principles, in this case the Principle of Universal Love that you find already reflected in your heart, which you can't get away from, or should you respond to popular opinions and deny what's in your heart?"
Next Page
|| - page index -
|| - chapter index -
|| - Exit -
||
|
