Žr. Dievas

Dešimt Dievo įsakymų yra Dievo šokyje Dievo Dvasios kampą išdėstanti sandara.

together.

Žr.taip pat: LoveGod, LoveYourNeighborAsYourself, LoveYourEnemy, Concerns, GoodUnderstanding, SharedUnderstanding, GodsWill, GoodWill

Vieningas asmuo, nevieningas kūnas; vieningas asmuo, nevieninga širdis/turtas ir t.t.

• God is Spirit.
• Structure is beyond Spirit.
• Good is Spirit in Structure.
• Life is the coinciding of the Spirit outside structure, and the Spirit within Structure. In other words, Life is the fact that God is good.

• Pažeisti svajonę, paneigti kūną: geisti žmogų
• Pažeisti svajonę, paneigti asmenį: geisti daiktą

Tuo tarpu Dievas gali suderinti visus lygmenis.

• nesvetimauti - širdį nuo kūno atkirsti
• nevogti - širdį nuo proto atkirsti
• negeisti svetimo daikto - valią nuo širdies atkirsti
• nemeluoti - valią nuo proto atkirsti

• nežudyti - protą nuo kūno atkirsti
• nevogti - širdį nuo kūno atkirsti
• nesvetimauti - širdį nuo proto atkirsti (neapsukti)
• nemeluoti - valią nuo širdies atkirsti
• negeisti svetimo daikto - valią nuo proto atkirsti
• negeisti svetimo žmogaus - valią nuo kūno atkirsti

Žmogus susidaro iš kūno (poreikiams), proto (abejonėms), širdies-jausmų (lūkesčiams) ir dvasios-valios (vertybėms). Dvasia reiškiasi kūnu; sandaros protu; atvaizdai širdimi; vieningumas valia. Teigiamais įsakymais jais visais mylime Dievą, netroškimais palaikome jo troškimus - kūnu amžiną gyvenimą, proto išmintį, širdimi gerą valią, valia Dievo valią. O neigiamais įsakymais draudžiame atskirti, atkirsti, atsieti, atplėšti juos:

• nežudyti - neatplėšti kūno ir proto
• nevogti - neatplėšti kūno ir širdies
• nesvetimauti - neatplėšti proto ir širdies (neapsukti)
• nemeluoti - neatplėšti širdies ir valios (neapgauti)
• negeisti svetimo daikto - neatplėšti proto ir valios
• negeisti svetimo žmogaus - neatplėšti kūno ir valios

See also: LoveGod, LoveYourNeighborAsYourself, LoveYourEnemy, {{Concerns}}, GoodUnderstanding, SharedUnderstanding, GodsWill, GoodWill

The Ten Commandments are 4 positive commandments ("Love God") plus 6 negative commandments ("Love your neighbor as yourself"). The six negative commandments prohibit us from playing God, from manipulating others in to making choices:

• murder - insist that victim choose to resist
• adulter - insist that victim choose to go along
• lie - insist that victim choose to not resist ("I would have stopped you")
• steal - insist that victim choose to not go along ("I didn't say you could have that")
• covet house (position?) - insist that victim choose to not choose
• covet things - insist that victim choose to choose

Here the victim may be the perpetrator and his or her associates. The problem with manipulation is that I can never completely manipulate myself. I will always have some freedom left. So who am I to go to somebody as a fighter with whom they must fight? or as a lover with whom they must love? I manipulate them to be like me, but I always know (my conscience!) that I am free to leave, even though my manipulations insist that they stay on. So the evil is my insistence of their staying in the face of my knowledge that I can leave. "Love your neighbor as yourself": slack is the difference between myself and my neighbor. My neighbor is anybody close enough for me to give slack to in any way. When we manipulate others, we hurt ourselves by tuning out the true openings in life.

http://www.ms.lt/en/andrius/understanding/diagrams/commandments.gif

[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/livingbytruth/message/308 June 2, 2003]

I am thinking more about the Ten Commandments, especially the six that are "Do not..."

I like the idea of there being different scopes in life, roughly: outlook, talk, work, life. And I think that the pairs of scopes are somehow relevant. But I need to figure that out better, what that means.

Here are some thoughts.

Generally, all six should somehow express "Love your neighbor as yourself".

The wrong comes somehow from collapsing the levels, perhaps:

Lie = care for talk without care for work Murder = care for outlook without care for life

Covet things = care for outlook without care for talk Steal = care for work without care for life

Covet people = care for outlook without care for work Commit adultery = care for talk without care for life

These are particular forms of dishonor for that which goes beyond outlook, talk, work.

It seems that, given two levels, we associate the broader level with our neighbor, the narrower with ourselves.

[http://groups.yahoo.com/group/livingbytruth/message/309 June 3, 2003]

I'm pursuing my thoughts... Maybe there is a connection somewhere with the idea of values. I think in leaps, not always explained, but perhaps they might encourage your own leaps in thought. Andrius, http://www.ms.lt

I should ask, What is a command?

I looked over my notes from the Gospel of John, and noted the "command" of God, associated with "I am the true vine". I think this is the sixth in the unfolding of the "I am" statements, and I think associated with structure, with its completion.

So perhaps from God's perspective, command (or the law) and structure are the same.

I wrote in April about the Spirit in the System:

> - God is Spirit. > - Structure is beyond Spirit. > - Good is Spirit in Structure. > - Life is the coinciding of the Spirit outside structure, and the Spirit > within Structure. In other words, Life is the fact that God is good.

I think of structure as the walls that allow for a richer geometry by which the Spirit can variously relate with itself.

The Spirit creates Structure as part of going beyond itself.

But as part of going beyond itself, I think it also embeds Spirit that finds itself within Structure. And that Spirit - we, the bounded - must manifest itself by going beyond itself, and beyond the structure, appealing to that which we project to be beyond. In this way we overcome the Structure that we find ourselves within.

So what does it mean to have a command?

What does that command appeal to?

I will think about this. But a command appeals to an inner coherence that we exercise through our will, and is backed up by an outer coherence that compels us. So perhaps it is a structure for relating an inner coherence and an outer coherence.

It has a lot to do with obeying. And therefore also with believing, and caring, for these are alternative reasons for following the will of the one who commands. Whether we obey, or believe, or care has to do, I think, with our relationships with our inner coherence. If we take it up directly - then we obey, if we take it up through another, a good example - then we believe, and if we take it up as a possibility, an option - then we care.

But in each case it takes place through the inside. So it would be helpful to think about the relationship between inner perspectives: self-control, faith, caring - and outer perspectives: justice, loyalty, duty.

So I note this connection: self-control = obey faith = believe caring = care which I hadn't noticed before, but the first three are the inner perspectives, and come from the representation of the sixsome in terms of cognition, and the latter three are the reasons for following the will.

So that is a step forward: two pieces of the jigzaw puzzle that fit together.