• Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
You are here:
Life – Consciousness

Descartes mind and bodyText by Ioannis Zisis
The Spirit of Simplicity is the Creative Fire. Creativity is the Mountain of Truth where the mind is transformed into a limpid light of sacrificial Love within the heart of beings. (Extract in sequence from the text of Ioannis Zisis, The Path of the Spirit I).
Commentary by Ioanna Moutsopoulou
But why is the Spirit of Simplicity the Creative Fire? The Creator is always abstraction or transcendence in relation to his creation.

This is the case because the self cannot be seen, but it is itself the observer of its form as a creation. Naturally, we must not here confuse the function of observation with the observer himself. At the same time we must not forget that the observer is an inadequate expression because in our apprehension he is inevitably associated with a dualism which is not thinkable in existence. Of course, dualism is an evolving state of consciousness and for that reason we cannot be absolute. But we can say with confidence that any transcendence wipes out the dualisms of certain level in the direction of an apprehension which is broader and owes more to synthesis.

Again, why is creativity the Mountain of Truth? But how are we to answer this when we do not know what is the nature of truth itself? Let us begin from the distinction between truth and reality. Reality concerns occurrences, forms in the world as it appears and is closely related to thought. It is, that is, the truth of this level. But truth itself is transcendental, it is not an event or form. In the field of abstraction, all concepts or ideas meet in a synthesis.

The idea of truth includes within it the capacity of the observer and therefore an incipient dualism of an inaccessible level, and has the closest affinity to self-awareness. Dualism is not a meaning which should alarm us when we believe in unity. These two co-exist, although the one is the generator of the other, the unified of the part. And dualism is a part of Being, but clearly it is not that exactly which we apprehend, that is, separateness and the void or non-unity. Nor must we be in a hurry to incorporate these exceptional and ontologically fundamental concepts into our own limited way of apprehending. What exists, exists, but we do not know it, nor do we understand it.

Creativity, then, facilitates the perception of truth, since by means of the creation of forms we can record in the visible field (in the thing created) what exists internally, even though it is not exactly the same. This is because there is not yet a unity, or, rather, a conception of unitariness between the creator and his creation, in our understanding. 'In the image and likeness' has a true basis, but it does not have the groundless and lower meaning which it is thought to have by the man who wishes to solve the problem immediately and quickly, and so attempts to give rough and ready answers which make his brief life bearable for him in terms of the attempted tormenting world-theory. Time-space is the vehicle of the appearance of inner tendencies, because simplicity is generative of infinite possibilities - those already existing, but, above all, new ones. Creativity is also the vehicle for lift-off towards the infinite or towards self-awareness of the infinite, because by bringing what internally exists into the light of consciousness, it opens up the portal successively to the infinity of potentialities.

The next question is why in this case the mind is transformed into a light of sacrificial love. The truth is not the mind itself, but the mind is the means for its recognition. This sacrificial love is two-way. It exists from the higher world which 'descends' to or creates the lower as a limitation or idol, but a limitation which is proof of an incomprehensible and innermost ontological freedom, in which, by this idol of limitation, any idolisation of the upper world is eliminated as being different from specific forms, thus recognising freedom in whatever conditions. This is a sacrifice which is based on love and means a sacrifice of idols. Moreover, in every sacrifice idols are sacrificed. There is also the love of the world of form in itself, which sacrifices the forms for the sake of 'elevation' to higher worlds. Sacrifice is everywhere as a result of immanent unity.

We should also note something important: consciousness concerns itself with idols.
The mind is the basic point or stage at which this sacrifice occurs. The misfortunes and sufferings of beings in our world are a sacrifice, but an involuntary one. Real sacrifice is the result of a willed, and not coercive, choice, nor is it something that is imposed.    

Text by Ioannis Zisis
Sacrificial love and equality are the essence of the will-for-Good, they are the beginning of the peace which surpasses the understanding. (Extract in sequence from the text of Ioannis Zisis, The Path of the Spirit.)

Commentary by Ioanna Moutsopoulou
As we have said before, love is identified with or is derived from the pre-existent unity or unitariness or synthesis as the nature of being.[1] Precisely because of this nature there is no separateness and the idols are sacrificed, not because they have no place in evolution, but because their meaning is not what man understands by them, since behind them is Being as their cause, and because they do not constitute the totality of Meaning or Truth. Being must be, in a few words, free in whatever state, within and outside the world.

This sacrifice, which is in reality the recognition of unity and involves the retreat of representation or of the idol, also has within it equality, because the absence of equality would mean separateness, power, and a void. But this equality is not the equality which man hastily and immaturely attempts when he is either of inferior abilities or not valued by society, regardless of his true worth. It is not, that is to say, an aggressive demand for social recognition. It is due to Being, which is the cause of all the forms and which is unified and recognises Its Self everywhere. Potentially, and in terms of evolution, the aim of beings is alike, but man does not like this and for this reason tries to snatch a supposed 'equality' from society, which, however, he wishes to use afterwards as a springboard to bring about a new inequality which will benefit himself. In reality, equality is not acceptable in the climate of competition, and – ironically – it is only as a competitive measure that it is accepted - and that only for a little time.

It is, however, precisely this sacrificial love and its inherent equality (because the one Self does not have inequalities within it) that are the necessary preconditions for there to be will-for-the-good. There is no converse of this love; it is the sole will that can exist because it is driven by existence and not by the error on non-existence and the void, and only an inability to understand permits the infiltration of error as to a supposed existence of an opposing will. Error is a phase in time and exists only in our apprehension, but has no ontological existence. That which turns towards evil is not will, but desire and inertia. The confusion between desire and will is proverbial and should one day be explored so that the necessary distinction can be made, so that such great confusion and the mixing of two mutually exclusive concepts is no longer induced. By this we do not mean that desire is useless, but simply that it is abusively employed and often does not serve its purpose.

The problem is that we are unable to make the leap from the one world (the one which we live in) to another-better-one suddenly and without the necessary processes taking place in the self; or, in other words, the problem is not whether we live in this or another world, but what we ourselves think and know. On the other hand, the simplistic assurance (in order for us to feel at ease with our self) that there are no errors is an even greater error. The fact that the fundamental problem is a problem of consciousness does not mean either that it is easy for us to escape from the problem, or that, since consciousness belongs to us, we can for that reason do whatever we like with it. On the contrary, the most difficult thing that man has to deal with is his consciousness. It is the source of the tragedy in him, and he has to pass through it abiding by the laws of life and evolution which he himself has not laid down, to the extent that he is a transitional part in the great Whole and its duration.  

This state of Being is true peace. Not the misinterpreted nirvana reached by means of spiritual selfishness, which retains divisiveness and is an escape from a world which is difficult to negotiate and oppressive. Thus man becomes indifferent to his evolutions, leaving individual evolution to play its role in the belief that some day - at a very distant point in time - everyone will depart from the field of problems. However, even when this happens - the achievement, that is, of some nirvana - the most important thing will be missing: the recognition of unity and responsibility towards it. Every true step is towards unity, and cannot be anything else.

Freedom, evolution, and love most strictly demand sacrifice and recognition of unity and synthesis, without this ending in the elimination of selfhood, but, on the contrary, its strengthening. The centre stage must belong to the Whole, to Unitariness, to Synthesis, but, at the same time, backstage the form which is harmonised with this Synthesis is stronger.

Peace, then, cannot be some balance of powers or balance of terror, but the self-awareness and full freedom of the Self which can only be realised through synthesis and love which leads to the sacrifice of the divisive forms, or, in other words, to their departure from the forefront of interest. This peace goes beyond the understanding of man; it is beyond form, even for those who can encompass it intellectually. This discernment of our limitations, that is, that intellectual conception does not guarantee a capability of putting into practice, and can protect us from arrogant and foolish certainties about a senseless personal surplus value and authority simply because we have grasped an idea.

In the end, the intrusion of any kind of competition cancels out peace. But man's problem is that he understands by 'peace' the absence of armed warfare - and only that! This is why this 'peace' is always doomed to fail. It will be asked: in that case, must forms of every kind be eliminated? No, because undoubtedly form fulfils an important purpose and what we perceive, however lofty its aspiration, constitutes a form. However, form must not be an end in itself, nor must it conceal the Whole and Reality – on the contrary, it must express it. Reduction or sacrifice is a complex and multifaceted process and can take on differing forms, because as potentialities they are inherent in everyone and are not located in some alien and strange place as separatenesses. The eternal problem lies in the relation between wholeness and the part, and for as long as we do not accept transcendental Wholeness, we are not going to solve it.

[1] It should be noted that these words lose the differentiation in meaning between them, especially when we are talking about such inaccessible fields of understanding. Perhaps at some other point we shall arbitrarily define, for the purposes of this or another text, a specific content for each of them, differentiating them into subtler shades of meaning.

Text: Ioannis Zisis, writer
Commentary: Ioanna Moutsopoulou, lawyer

Photo from wikimedia

For further reading:
- Introductory Note to the Path of the Spirit
- The Path of the Spirit I

Creative Commons License
You are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work.  
Under the following conditions: