I am far from an expert on such matters as the time and space continuum, but I understand this concept a little differently. I do not believe that our earthly concept of time applies to the meta-causal world. We read in Ostad Elahi’s Knowing the Spirit that one minute in the interworld (which is still in the causal world) can correspond to a completely different measure of time (year, month, etc.) on earth.

But what I do believe exists even in the non-material world is the concept of progression. According to Ostad Elahi’s view, everything is contingent; only God is sempiternal. My understanding of that is that creation is gradual, and therefore, there is a notion of progression, even if it is beyond my grasp and inexplicable by my limited vocabulary and understanding regarding time. The process of perfection is also a gradual process. So the self cannot know all that it will eventually come to know, or the entire process would be futile, and God, by definition, does not do anything that is futile. So I think the natural and logical conclusion is that the process of learning (acquiring and retaining knowledge and information) is gradual and has a temporal nature, even if it does not (and it most likely does not) correspond to how we understand time.

I don’t believe so. Animals are pure instinct. An animal cannot, by definition, have an imperious self because the imperious self is a malfunction; it is not a creational existence. And because animals do not have a transcendent reason or free will, the notion of making decisions between the so-called “good” and the “bad” is not applicable to them.

Ali Tinat(Zoghi): “It is of little importance whether the imperious self has a creational existence/pattern or it is formed as the result of malfunctioning or dysfunction of other faculties…”

I respectfully disagree. I think it matters a great deal for us to be aware of the fact that the imperious self only has an incidental or functional existence, rather than a creational existence. As a preliminary matter, God, by definition does not create anything evil; therefore, as a basic axiom, the imperious self CANNOT have an independent existence.

Second, this is a fundamental fact about the self, and if we assume that our goal is self-knowledge, then what the self is made up of and how it functions is highly relevant. Third, this is relevant for the additional reason that this fact will help us fight the imperious self.

The reason is that by knowing that the imperious self is not this “thing” within us that is responsible for our “bad” acts (we cannot “blame” the devil within), we will be forced to acknowledge that we were the ones who committed a “bad” act by allowing one or more of our other faculties to go out of balance. By tracing the source of these imbalances, we can diagnose the root of the problem and either remedy it and/or prevent a future occurrence. Of course, on this highly theoretical level, this is much easier said than done, but based on personal experience, I believe that the theory works.

A very simple example to illustrate the point is the following: I get very angry and lash out at someone without justification. I recognize that this anger comes from my imperious self. Now what? I need to find the source in order to neutralize it. If I assume that there is an independent source of anger in me, I would have difficulty finding and controlling it (because my premise would be wrong, if you accept O. Elahi’s theories). It also might give me an excuse to see the problem somehow separate from myself.

But if I recognize my anger as what it is, i.e., an imbalance on my irascible faculty, then I can trace all my feelings back to my instinct of “rejecting loss” (FSN) and try to find out where and how something that is natural and warranted in the first place transformed into something that crossed a line and violated a right. This process is the essence of gaining self-knowledge, which I do not believe is possible without having the basic facts about the self straight.

Human beings have much in common with animals. They eat, breathe and sleep; we eat, breathe and sleep. Are we different? Or is a human being just a walking, talking gorilla?

A dog wakes up in the morning and decides what to eat first – his water or his Purina. A human being also wakes up and decides what to eat for breakfast – some cereal or a bagel.

Humans and animals both seem to make decisions. What is the difference? Do dogs worry about going on a diet? “My gosh,” cries Fido, “I’ve got to control this appetite!” Do they question whether it’s right to finish off the last drop of milk and not leave any for their kennel-mates? Does a dog wake up in the morning plagued with existential questions like, what is my purpose in life? Does he worry how he is making a difference with his life, or if he is actualizing his potential?

We do have a lot of things in common with animals, but free will is not one of them. Choosing your favorite ice cream or what to eat for breakfast is a matter of preference, not free will. Free will is the choice between good and evil. To exercise your free will, the choice must include a moral dimension and precipitate a struggle between right and wrong.

Only mankind has the ability to discern right from wrong and to make moral judgments. It is this ability that makes human beings responsible for their actions.

When we hear the news of a shark attack, we don’t blame the shark. We know he’s just doing what comes naturally. We don’t suspect the shark chose to attack out of evil intent and really could have called upon his nobler instincts and spared his victim.

But when a human being attacks, he is held accountable for his actions. A choice was made and he is responsible.

Free will is mankind’s unique and crowning distinction. The Torah says that only mankind was created “in the image of God.” Yet God doesn’t have an image! It means that only mankind has the true freedom and independence that comes with the power of choice. In that way we resemble God, who is completely free and independent.

The next time you encounter a moral dilemma, use your free will. You can rise above your baser instincts and ennoble your life through choosing good. We have the choice to strive to be good, not animals. This is our unique responsibility.

IN SUMMARY

* Even though every person is born with a distinct personality and is given a unique set of circumstances, we all share the power to choose freely.

* Free will is not choosing an ice cream flavor. It is the ability to choose between good and evil.

* Free will engenders responsibility. People, not dogs, are accountable for their actions, since only people can discern between right and wrong.

It is of little importance whether the imperious self has a creational existence/pattern or it is formed as the result of malfunctioning or dysfunction of other faculties. What matters most is that we humans all are imbued with this element and for a very good reason.
Had it not been for the existence of the imperious self, hence our constant battle to tame it to our advantage, there would not have been any progress of our souls toward perfection.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kUyFeSizr0