Sunday, 18 September 2016

The Divine Right of Being

Daily Bell article:
Delhi Cuts Copyright: Why Are Government Courts Involved at All?

This in response to the comment shown below about divine rights.



A divine right cannot be taken away or it would not BE divine, but it can be lost sight of and believed not to be - as a result of not being in one's right mind.

Divine extension can be reflected and shared in our own extensions of worth - such as to extend the right to life that we feel and know moving as our self; as our being - prior to self-defining claims and defended assertions of struggle within conflicted self.

The use of imagination is a divine right - including the ability to disregard or invalidation of any imagination that does not support or reinforce a defended claim to be a self in one's own right - as opposed to being divinely created, guided and sustained.

However, the assignment of divine attributes to human invention is a self-aggrandising and usurping of the movement of being by a narrative control mentality founded in the belief that the right to live is taken and held by force and guile and so can and will be taken back - but 'over my dead body' - that is to say my 'will' or mind is now defined as resisting and defending the 'loss' of such a self-asserted 'right'.

If you can imagine it, you can focus within the desire to bring it into being.
There was no need for a term for 'real' until fakery arose from defining SOMETHING real to the rejection and exclusion of all else. Likewise human IS divine prior to the redefinition of human in 'fallen' or corrupted terms of self-agrandisement - and so is not 'lost' so much as lost sight of amidst the struggle within division for the reparation of lost or denied 'right'.

Law in truth is Alive - but the law of stone tablets operates as a controlling mechanism or device in place of a Living Law that is believed either LOST or NOT existing. The term "the spirit of the law' points to the living purpose of the law - where the 'letter' of the law gives 'rights' to the dead or un-mindful mechanism of precedent in form - while disregarding the spirit that gives form - so as to assume the right to define or judge reality in terms of form - which of course becomes the mask for hidden or trojan agenda to operate 'unseen'.

The struggle for power is the attempt to overcome or escape believed or feared powerlessness. And the display of such power is the need for personal support and reinforcement of that which otherwise would not be felt and known true - because it is an imagination - regardless the degree of investment of assertive claim and defence brought to bear on its behalf.

The equality of the divinity of humankind is not in our physical birth - but in our Soul expression. False framing is the deceit of the mind given power of identification. If you act as if something is true - then in that moment you make - and experience it true for you - regardless if it has any true resonance or belonging in you at all.

Framing spirit or purpose in forms of flesh points to a specific focus in which a universal perspective can seem lost, denied, betrayed or abandoned - because a specific 'mind' experiences itself as 'separate' and defends against universal as if that will result in loss of self rather than the recognition and extension of self in the whole (in all).

I sketch out in idea as an invitation to reflect and consider - not as a claim to fix down in definition. If something works for you - then use it for what it clearly is and does - along the purpose you accept and recognize as your own - even if not what you previously claimed and defended as your right.

If nothing here speaks to your interest then that also is your freedom to follow only what interests or enlivens and resonates in you - for your own reasons and through your own devices. But all choices have consequences by which you can re-evaluate who you truly are and what you truly want - regardless the choices that brought you to this moment of discovery.

Doing as you are moved is already in motion but the attempt to redefine your 'self' as the 'doer' separates a sense of 'you' from the movement and assigns power of good and ill over Life. Not in truth  - but in accepted judgement, believed and experienced. To move in alignment with being rather than identify in resistance against or upon it, is felt freedom in joy. There is nothing more satisfying that being who you truly are - and yet the 'right' to claim different in self defined identity is held onto as a precious and treasured possession-ability - by which to be possessed and rendered worthless.

I responded to your post - whether I have any right to, is secondary to the fact. It could be be denied expression by editors - or denied attention by disregard - yet I have the benefit/consequence of living this response - and of a fresh perspective arising from it. I share it to that which is receptive and listening - that has not been invalidated, inhibited, suppressed or denied in readers or in being. I cannot give the power or right to read it - but I can honour that capacity to choose to focus where you recognize yourself regardless if it is currently used to ensure you do not. And I can illuminate where poor choices result in poor outcomes as a natural  support for your right to make better or more aligned choices with respect to who you truly are and can recognize and appreciate yourself to be.

There will always be a metaphysical presumption that logic then unfolds - and confusion of the concept with the living operates no less logically in its resulting confusion - but of course a concept of self cannot see or know or re-evaluate anything - but can be used to 'see' all things likewise separated from true Cause - as a world of separate effects resulting from conflicting purposes. All of this may seem impractical - yet the operation of such device of deceit is the principle bone of contention among Daily Bell association... of a sense of coercive limitation and interference in one's freedom - as it is felt, desired, imagined and believed to be.

In reply to:

 Todd B. Marshall


“Copyright is not a divine right.”

There is no such thing as a "divine" right ... just as a "divine" of any kind is a figment of 94% of the world's population.

That notwithstanding, know what a right actually is: A "right" is a "defended" "claim". Make a claim and fail to defend it, you have no right. Fail to even make a claim and you have no right. Regardless of the founding fathers confusion on the subject, there is no such thing as an "inalienable right".

No comments:

Post a Comment