The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

In 1966 they made a movie (film) by that name. Clint Eastwood was the ‘Good’, the rest did not matter.  We should, however, define what stands behind the qualities assigned to those three men. After all, we often apply such adjectives to people we know hardly anything about. For instance, Clint was “good for whom”? If for himself then, surely, he might have been ‘Bad’ for others. He was. And ‘Ugly’ in whose opinion?

Later religions took up the idea and made it easy. God is good and Satan is bad. With that out of the way, they were left just with the Ugly.

The good, bad and the ugly is very reminiscent of the hot, the cold and the lukewarm of the Revelation of John. According to him, Yeshûa, later called Jesus, said, “because you are… neither hot nor cold, I’m about to spit you out of my mouth…”

Nasty that. I’d hate to be spat upon, let alone expelled from any orifice. Could hot or cold, mean good or bad? It looks like ‘lukewarm’ must be the Ugly one.

None of this makes any sense unless we define what is good or bad. Otherwise, the paradox is not solvable. An ethical enigma let alone dilemma.

In my previous blog I tried to define who we are and why we are here—in this transient, ephemeral, reality.

Ancient scriptures are compendia of knowledge accumulated over long periods of time about the nature of reality. The ancients already knew what our scientists only rediscovered in recent years—that the world we live in is illusory (Maya), and virtually empty space; and that we are temporary embodiments of the Single Consciousness (a quantum field?) that uses all means at its disposal to “gather experience of Becoming”.

The “hot or the cold” are the attributes of embodiments defining how they lend themselves for this purpose. If hot—they are suitable for exciting experiments, if cold—they present a challenge. Lukewarm, insipid, phlegmatic units are of little use. We must never forget that the Individualized Consciousness uses not just our physical bodies, but our mental and emotional potential to the full.

Hence hot or cold, exciting or challenging, are of much greater use, let alone fun.

For as long as we identify only with external envelopes we temporarily occupy, we miss the point of life. We miss also the teaching of the great scriptures which, though originally protected by priesthood, do not,  nor ever had, anything to do with any religion.

The quicker we rediscover this truth, the sooner we shall derive benefit from the millennia of observations, deductions, and conclusions contained in various scriptures, usually protected by a veil of symbolism against the ravages of time and misinterpretation.

 (“…casting pearls before swine…”, remember?)

In time we shall accept that Truth must be continuously rediscovered. This is the nature of life. Until we conquer the veil of symbolism, we shall tread water on the Wheel of Awagawan.  

Ancient knowledge is ours to decipher.

DICTIONARY of BIBLICAL SYMBOLISM

Also available at Smashwords and other outlets.

FREE DOWNLOADS

for reviewers at:

mailto:stan@stanlaw.ca

Your thoughts are important to me.

Also available in paperback.