To show you how confused is the understanding of someone who
doesn’t grasp these principles, a local columnist interested in my ideas, so
he called them, made the statement that I believe that man should not be
blamed for anything he does which is true only when man knows what it
means that his will is not free. If he doesn’t know, he is compelled to blame
by his very nature. Christ also received incursions of thought from this
same principle which compelled him to turn the other cheek and remark as
he was being nailed to the cross, “They know not what they doâ€, forgiving
his enemies even in the moment of death. How was it possible for him to
blame them when he knew that they were not responsible? But they knew
what they were doing and he could not stop them even by turning the other
cheek.
Religion was compelled to believe that God was not responsible for
the evil in the world, whereas Spinoza and Christ believed correctly that
there was no such thing as evil when seen in total perspective. But how
was it possible, except for people like Christ and Spinoza, to forgive those
who trespassed against them? And how was it possible for those who
became victims of this necessary evil to look at it in total perspective? Is it
any wonder man cried out to God for understanding? The time has arrived
to clear up all the confusion and reconcile these two opposite principles,
which requires that you keep an open mind and proceed with the
investigation. Let me show you how this apparent impasse can be
rephrased in terms of possibility.
If someone is not being hurt in any way, is it possible for him to retaliate
or turn the other cheek? Isn’t it obvious that in order to do either he must
first be hurt? But if he is already being hurt and by turning the other cheek
makes matters worse for himself, then he is given no choice but to retaliate
because this is demanded by the laws of his nature. Here is the source of
the confusion. Our basic principle or corollary, Thou Shall Not Blame, call
it what you will, is not going to accomplish the impossible. It is not going
to prevent man from desiring to hurt others when not to makes matters
worse for himself, but it will prevent the desire to strike the very first blow.
Once you have been hurt, it is normal and natural to seek some form of
retaliation for this is a source of satisfaction which is the direction life is
compelled to take. Therefore this knowledge cannot possibly prevent the
hate and blame which man has been compelled to live with all these years
as a consequence of crimes committed, and many other forms of hurt, yet
God’s mathematical law cannot be denied for man is truly not to blame for
anything he does notwithstanding, so a still deeper analysis is required in
order to break the cycle of attack and retaliation.
Down through history no
one has ever known what it means that man’s will is not free and how it can
benefit the world, but you will be shown the answer very shortly. There is
absolutely no way this new world, a world without war, crime and all forms
of hurt to man by man can be stopped from coming into existence. When it
will occur, however, depends on when this knowledge can be brought to
light.
We have been growing and developing just like a child from infancy.
There is no way a baby can go from birth to old age without passing
through the necessary steps, and no way man could have reached this
tremendous turning point in his life without also going through the
necessary stages of evil. Once it is established, beyond a shadow of doubt,
that will is not free (and here is why my discovery was never found; no one
could ever get beyond this impasse because of the implications), it becomes
absolutely impossible to hold man responsible for anything he does. Is it
any wonder the solution was never found if it lies hidden beyond this point?
If you recall, Durant assumed that if man was allowed to believe his will is
not free it would lessen his responsibility because this would enable him to
blame other factors as the cause. “If he committed crimes, society was to
blame; if he was a fool, it was the fault of the machine which had slipped a
cog in generating him.†It is also true that if it had not been for the
development of laws and a penal code, for the constant teaching of right and
wrong, civilization could never have reached the outposts of this coming
Golden Age. Yet despite the fact that we have been brought up to believe
that man can be blamed and punished for doing what he was taught is
wrong and evil (this is the cornerstone of all law and order up to now,
although we are about to shed the last stage of the rocket that has given us
our thrust up to this point); the force that has given us our brains, our
bodies, the solar and the mankind systems; the force that makes us move in
the direction of satisfaction, or this invariable law of God states explicitly,
as we perceive these mathematical relations, that SINCE MAN’S WILL IS
NOT FREE, THOU SHALL NOT BLAME ANYTHING HE DOES. This
enigma is easily reconciled when it is understood that the mathematic
corollary, God’s commandment, does not apply to anything after it is done
– only before.