Indeed, but you must understand that Being has no final purpose, goal or plan, that is to say, beyond simply being. Further, though it appears, as you say, that evolution is driving the Universe toward ever more complex forms such as cognizant living beings, this is only an illusion; for there can be no Universe without that there already existed such a cognizant being. So too is it with all things, for the Principle of Identity creates each thing after its own kind, and if a certain kind of thing does not already exist – potentially, then it simply cannot arise.Iolaus wrote:Well, I guess this bears some thought. There is surely a perfecting process going on, for example, we have evolution, of galaxies and life forms. Not randomly, but intelligently and with purpose.
Ignorance and the suffering that it generates are relative entities, and so are not real; nevertheless, they seem real enough to those sentient beings who do not know better. On the other hand, the complement of suffering – joy, partakes of an absolute existence, and so is always present. The reason we sometimes cannot experience joy is not because it is not present, but because our suffering has obscured it.How do you reconcile suffering, and ignorance, with perfection?
Indeed. It is said that the suffering of remorse at one’s past actions is a poor substitute for the renunciation of such actions in the future.Yes, that is a form of perfection, and also a clue that there is no real guilt, all are perfect and pure.
Yes, certainly, but one must be wary of the ego-personality, which will subtly insinuate itself in the most altruistic of activities. How does one know that the ego is involved? It is very simply, if a thing need be thought out in advance of doing it, then this action is one of the ego. The awakened ones do not plan to help others, they simply do it – wherever and whenever the need arises, and they always do what is appropriate in every situation, for their guidance comes, not from the ego, but from their true self. Jesus once said that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and the Buddha, that an unselfish act cannot bring about suffering, and though the two statement may not appear equivalent, they are.I wouldn't argue with it, at the same time, one can begin serving immediately.
I once new a man who was so distraught at the thought that there were children going hungry in the world that he worked himself nearly to the point of a breakdown to raise money for an aid organization; but in the end, was it the suffering of the children he wanted to alleviate, our was it his own suffering that he was trying to escape? Now, it would appear that it really doesn’t matter, for in either case, the children were getting more food, but we cannot fool the Absolute, and the outcome of each case will be quite different, and if it was his own needs that he was serving, then he will have brought about, not less suffering in the world, but more.