All Just Is, E.C.Nemeth [important books to read .TXT] 📗

as it does, outside the realm of the universe and beyond our ability to examine). It in no way alters the fact that from our point of view they are necessary. The monopole and the nopole exhibit the dualistic characteristics of our resulting universe. A basic comparison would be to say that the monopole is to light what the nopole is to dark, but before the universe existed.
Before time began is a place that defies logical analysis, at least at the outset. There is no way to infer such a structure’s properties. Remember, we are talking about All, or God, and that has no labels, no possible description because any definition lessens its infinite qualities. The purpose of the term All, as opposed to the term God, was to rid the idea of the Divine of all subjective attributes based on personal beliefs derived from religious affiliations. You may have a personal vision of God but All is strictly inter-personal and extremely diffuse, nearly intangible. Another word for this is unmanifest. In terms of our position inside of the universe All is unmanifest.
All remains intangible because it is a state whole and complete unto itself whereas our state continues to evolve. It is the nature of thought to deal with contrasting information and it insists upon using this system to clarify its bafflement with the concept of All. It is also the nature of rational thought to take for granted its own dualistic tendencies. The pros and cons are tools of the mind and the mind is a product of this universe of duality. That is why the nature of God has to be explained both in terms of all that is and all that is not. That is how we think, pure and simple.
Therein lies the clue. We think this way because we are immersed in a dualistic universe: everything has its opposite here. Even the very first moment of our universe contained both light and its antithesis, dark. Given the nature of archetypes, it seems reasonable to assume that there must have been a template in existence before the beginning of the universe that influenced the consequent development of it. That is why the need arises for the two new terms of monopole and nopole.
Unity
To appease our dualistic mentality it is necessary to visualize the dissolution of All into two distinct portions. This polarized All then becomes the monopole and the nopole. In truth All is not lessened by this polarization because it need not have occurred until the instant before the universe began (if it truly happened at all), which thereby cancels its impact upon the whole. The nature of the universe would have to be explored in more detail to truly grasp why that is so, suffice it to say that the sum of the entire cosmos is zero and leave it there for the time being.
From the point of view of this book, and remembering its basic premise that All just is, the monopole can be viewed as the desire of the Divine and the nopole can be seen as the means to satisfy that desire. The monopole is like God’s divine cross-section, that piece of God that can fit in the universe. The nopole is that cross-section’s shadow. It is merely an error in viewpoint that requires such a configuration but it does align the logical parameters in a way that makes ample sense. We can all agree that God created the universe. Here we are inferring an attribute that must have been present in order to explain the dualistic nature of that universe. God, the ultimate homeostatic and homogenous entity had an idea that was then implemented. This implies movement. The idea of the polarization of All can be this movement in action. More will be said of this in later chapters for it is a very important concept. It is sufficient to say that the polarization of All into the monopole and nopole set off a chain reaction in the form of a wave that has orchestrated each successive moment right up to the present day.
We must remember, too, that the moment of polarization occurred before the universe began. At that time there was just a sudden shift in focus by God. We cannot infer what such a shift would entail or describe it in any way. We must also keep in mind that All is at no time missing from the equation. When the monopole and nopole come into being All is still present. All does not ever cease to be.
And that is why the third concept is unity. The monopole/nopole are not separate from All but exist within the whole. The inclusion principle is necessary from the inference that God is all there is and all there is not. Therefore, nothing can be separate from the godhead (the context of All).
So from the viewpoint of the universe there were four distinct concepts already in place before the universe even existed. Those four archetypes are All, monopole, nopole and unity. All is not effected by the transitional phase of monopole and nopole or by the fact of its constant unity, its intrinsic wholeness.
Dot’s story
In the story, The Circle and the Dot, Dot’s first encounter with Camarilla is the depiction of the interaction between the monopole and nopole. Dot goes to see the beginning of creation but is scared by the heat and pressure so he steps out of the fledgling universe. What is there outside of the universe? Dot interprets it as a place that seems to be vast but is also one single entity. He describes it as a feeling of bigger than big and smaller than small at the same time. That description is the state of All, the realm of the Divine, the godhead.
Notice that although the realm of the Divine is inclusive in nature there is still Dot and Camarilla besides. But since the godhead must include everything, Dot and Camarilla must be distinct parts of All. Yet how can a perfectly homogenous state have inhomogeneities within it?
It is this contradiction that pulls the two into intimate contact because to include is to love. The impulse to include implies that a state of separation exists. If the state of separation is actually an error in viewpoint then that separation will be filled with the feeling of love. Since by definition All is complete then nothing can be separate from All. If something is perceived to be separate and distinct from All then love will fill the perceived gap. Love is the feeling of unity, which is the absolute truth about our reality. That truth declares that we are all one.
From Dot’s viewpoint he is the nopole and Camarilla is the monopole. They exist in the first place because God had an intention. That intention embodies the monopole. The thing that the monopole will fashion into God’s intention is the nopole. Together they will spawn the universe and it will evolve according to their dictates. That evolution is God’s intention made manifest over the span of the universe’s existence.
So just as in reality there are four distinct forms before creation even happened so too in the story. In reality there was All, the monopole, the nopole and unity. In the story All is represented by the location of the scene itself. Dot said that every speck of the place seemed to be connected to every other speck thus implying its homogeneity. The monopole is Camarilla because she will give birth to the universe which is the same as God’s intention being made manifest. The nopole is Dot because he has a mission and he intends to discharge it successfully – even though the mission, especially if stated up front, would seem not only daunting but downright impossible to accomplish.
The final form, unity, is represented by the love of Camarilla and Dot. Notice how after sensing the odd character of the place itself the first thing he sees is Camarilla and he instantly recognizes his love for her. This dynamic was introduced to bring to light the exalted status of love in this world. The ironic part is that we see love itself as a scarce resource when it is in fact the most abundant element in the cosmos. Wherever there is separation there is love – that’s the bottom line.
Universal logic
Notice that just as in the universe there is energy (light) and matter (dark), the first summed up by one contemporary force (electro-magnetic spectrum) and the second by three more (gravity, strong and weak nuclear), in the place before the universe existed there was All and then the monopole, nopole and unity appeared. This is the archetype of relative thinking. It cannot be sidestepped. The interesting thing is that it is a very good measure of truth in any system if it begins with one statement or prime postulate that is in turn supported by three additional postulates. It is the power of three to define in terms of relativity. A thesis is submitted along with its anti-thesis and from which the synthesis results. The synthesis is a third element that is dependent on the first two but still represents a completely new ‘thesis’ in its own right.
The nature of light reveals the basic tendency of the universe. Light is both matter and wave. Its behavior at any particular moment is dependent on which of its two aspects is under scrutiny. It is upon this fact that the rest of the universe relies and it is for this reason that the universe is a place of relativity. The universe is dualistic in nature. It is where a thing can stand separate from its opposite. That a thing and its very opposite can exist simultaneously is a marvel in its own right. In our universe it is a common occurrence.
Although the above points to the obvious conclusion that our universe is primarily a giant illusion, there is another factor to consider. A place of relativity, where opposites co-exist, is the ideal environment for experience. In a fundamental way the universe is experience. Although the universe is experience there has to be an experiencor for the whole thing to make any sense.
Since there is only God here, why does God desire experience?
The idea of infinity has many difficult concepts to contend with. It is true that since infinity is everything it is anything as well. Here is the sticky part. Infinity is not anything by itself. Infinity holds all anythings at once . There is no separation between things because all are one thing and are connected to everything else. So in infinity there can be no delineation of anything because there is only the all of it. Since God is also infinite could it be that in God’s natural state God can’t experience?
The finite world of the universe is an illusion but it is also a place of contrast and comparison, where a thing can stand alone and be accounted for. That is the single difference. Infinity may suffuse and surround our finite universe but where it is one the worlds are many. Each phenomenon can be described and put in its proper place, separate and distinct from the others. That is what experience requires, lots of other things which are different. It may be odd to consider that there is an infinity of discrete sections that the finite universe can be portioned into but that does not lessen the fact that experience seems to be the domain of our universe.
It does bring up the possibility that by delineating the infinite this work has broken its own rule and indirectly described God because God is infinite. It may seem as though it has, but it is not the same as defining infinity which is an abstract mathematical model. It is very