"The Divine Mechanism of Creation and Evolution involves two mysteries: the visible (form) and the invisible (non).

It is relatively easy to observe the form, but studying the non is exceedingly challenging. A veil of secrecy separates the visible from the invisible.

From the inception of the universe's creation to the present day, even the most enlightened individuals have been unable to fully unveil this secret veil to examine the non comprehensively.

Fortunately, humanity has been granted a key, which is the observation of the relationship between form and non in the activities of all things.

To be in accordance with the Divine Mechanism of Creation and Evolution, the non and the form must harmonize.

In the universe, there is Yin and Yang (positive and negative); in material, there is the shape and the essence.

Animals possess an astral and physical body, while humans have a spirit and a temporal body.

The formation of everything in the universe occurs through the harmony between substance and essence.

Due to variations in the evolutionary levels among the essence or soul of minerals, plants, animals, humans, spirits like Angels, Saints, Buddha, and God, each category takes on a different form.

Minerals differ from vegetables, vegetables from animals, animals from humans, humans from angels, angels from saints, saints from Buddha, and Buddha from God. Form and spirit are distinct in each.

"Material must obey the essence to assume a shape". Evidence of this can be seen in the diverse conformity between the spirit and form in the human physical body.

A wicked individual may exhibit unusual bodily characteristics, while a virtuous one radiates brilliance in appearance. Our ancestors observed appearances to predict behavior.

The physical body must align with the spirit just as material aligns with essence. Material is visible, essence is invisible, and the non and the form must harmonize.

Consequently, we understand the non by observing the form, and we affirm the non through the form."

"I wanted to discuss the supernatural value of religion, bringing together the truths found in different doctrines.

However, fearing that delving into mysticism might exceed the listeners' comprehension and, consequently, be of no value, I chose to consider the realities of religious life in society.

This allows for the development of an ideology consistent with humanity's current intellectual evolution, offering guidance to truth-seekers.

I expressed concern that contemporary religious organizations appeared antiquated, unable to inspire society or provide the necessary encouragement for human spirit, guiding principles for thought, or harmony in thought and action.

The consequence of this void was a tumultuous society increasingly inclined toward materialism, disregarding the ownership of the spirit.

I posed the question of how humanity would navigate this earthly existence with weakened minds and a debilitated conscience.

Natural law, I argued, mandated that each individual pay particular attention to their way of life. I stressed the importance of recognizing that life, if governed solely by material law, would relegate humans to an existence akin to animals.

I emphasized the distinction between spirit and material, highlighting that while material had its shape and limitations, the spirit was inherently free and boundless.

All aspects of existence, regardless of their scale, adhered to the universal law governing the order of phenomena. This law dictated that material must have an origin and an owner, underscoring the importance of the concept of ownership.

I acknowledged that societies were being driven into turmoil and violence due to disputes over material possessions.

The life of an animal was driven by sustenance and shelter, while humans, in their pursuit of material wealth, had resorted to harming and even killing each other.

In stark contrast, spiritual life was characterized by self-control, boundlessness, and permanence across time and space, as articulated in the teachings of late saints and sages.

I pointed out the apparent disconnect between the two modes of living — materialistic and spiritual — and noted the challenge of reconciling these conflicting paradigms despite humanity's advanced intellectual development.

I ventured that the mind appeared more active when the stomach was empty and less so when sated.

Further, I noted that no religion had successfully reconciled materialism with spirituality. Some leaned toward spirituality, overlooking material concerns, while others favored materialism, neglecting spiritual development.

This divergence had created a stark divide among their followers. I questioned whether any religious founders possessed the necessary spiritual power, virtue, and wisdom to unite these opposing factions and make society universal.

In the 20th century's intellectual enlightenment, I recognized the evident interdependence of spirit and material, questioning the division between these two realms — spirit pitted against material, the non opposed to the form.

I attributed this division to interpretations of Confucianism and Taoism rather than the original teachings of Confucius or Lao-Tzu. I stressed that no force could separate intellect from the human body or disentangle the non from the form.

According to natural law, spiritual and temporal bodies held equivalent value, with each needing the other.

I underscored that laity represented materiality while religion embodied the Tao. These two facets were equivalent and indispensable for creating life.

CaoDaism, I proclaimed, was a religion founded on conscience, incorporating teachings from various world doctrines. It served as a mediator, uniting diverse ideologies, guiding humanity toward perfection.

I emphasized that natural law granted conscience the freedom of thought, allowing thoughts to evolve with changing societal conditions, supporting human betterment.

I posited that if the Tao represented the sole path for human psychology, then the spirit must enjoy freedom of faith, as long as religious activities supported the laity and did not contradict religion itself.

This sublime doctrine, I believed, could bring peace to human psychology, fostering societal harmony and universal unity.

In an era marked by disparities in progress among nations, where civilization coexisted with barbarism, it was challenging to unite races by merely comparing visible aspects of each nation.

Inequality in national resources and varying national circumstances necessitated political diversity. Attempting to create a universal world by uniting nations based on such comparisons was an uncertain endeavor, causing more harm than good.

I contended that those pursuing materialism in the hope of bringing genuine peace to humanity were engaging in a deceptive endeavor, akin to trying to relocate the moon to Earth in the vastness of the universe — a deceptive ploy to maintain authority.

I asserted that true happiness could only be achieved when humanity recognized that they were not meant to lead lives akin to animals for happiness.

Instead, they needed to respect the lives of all creatures, foster love, mutual assistance, cooperation, and consider these principles as a way of life. CaoDaism, through its noble actions and sublime ideology, promised humanity this authentic happiness."

"I wish for eternal unity. The new doctrine I teach aims to bring you into one community of shared interests and lives.

Unite eternally according to My will and spread peace and mutual love throughout the world."