To examine our intentions, we need to look at our aversions and wishes. I believe we all want a happy ending. This is why so many movies have resolution, happy endings.
I hope we can use the ultimate wish for a happy ending as a way to resolve psychological beasties such as wanting to punish people who we perceive as bad, such as the Dick Cheneys of the world. We have to realize that in the wrong circumstance, we could be a potential Dick Cheney or Hitler. They are examples of ego run amok.
The wish to create a Heaven solely for “good” people might be based on an incomplete understanding of the nature of “good.”
By accepting inequality and rejecting connectedness, “we good people” could inadvertantly condemn billions of souls to slavery to serve us according to “our” projected idea of Heaven, if it is split into a Heaven/Hell dichotomy. Metaphors: slave labor camps, wage slavery, excessive capitalism, prisons, etc. I do not want my heaven to come at the expense of some one else, but my conception of dichotomy might inadvertently create Hell. It is important, then, to not condemn those one sees as hellish, because those people could actually be seen as extensions of what any one of us are capable of in the wrong circumstances.
This is why the question of Heaven/Hell, the subconscious, cultural nuances, the shadow, and the innate ideal and hope for an ultimate good (one that integrates forgiveness and the ‘bad’) are so very important.
I am most familiar with the “Christian” framework of looking at things, and hope to resolve my anger at “Christians” in order to rectify the evil I have inflicted upon “them” by “my” projected anger onto them.
I have a theory that working the inside of the perceived/projected failed “parent” culture by adopting that culture and addressing its ills is a useful way to understand what it is “we” project and what “we” expect.
Smith says that the quotes around I, we, you, etc., makes my message cumbersome to read. It is also cumbersome to type. I think it would be good for me to keep this in my mindset when I need it as I think it is the fundamental, underlying, collaborative reality–that of a mass, shared mind. However, I can understand his point of view.