The translator makes the point that both Essence and Existence are abstractions. One can sequence them however one likes, but they remain ideas divorced from experience, from what he calls Being.
Proceeding from this point, Kum Nye becomes an extraordinarily logical act of philosophy, since it offers a practical method for returning to experience, to Being.
God is Being. And until we “speak” being with our selves, with our souls, God remains an abstraction. The only reliable source of wisdom and comfort in this world relies in a return to what is, and that is not done with the mind.
I had meant to point this metaphor out a week or two ago, but don’t recall actually typing it. If the goal is to get from A to D, logic can be B and C, but it cannot be A or D. A is what we want, what our hearts desire. It is the source of logical operations. It is the source of the problem we are trying to solve. D is the desired end state, which is also a feeling. It is a change from A. It is progress in a way which matters.
Logic can always be a means, but never a final end. I can add to that, but it is close enough for my purposes.
Actually, I will add that the root problem we all face is separation, separation on many levels, but most pressingly from our own Source, from the light which animates us. Logic–and the language which it necessarily uses–is always a means of making distinctions, of drawing out differences. It, in important respects, IS the source of separation.
If you set this template on religion, and philosophy, one starts to see recurring patterns. The whole of reality is constituted by what David Bohm called an Implicate Order, which is yet another word for what I am speaking of.
The most obvious example occurring to me at the moment: “Worueber man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen.”