The Choice to Love
(2004)
Table of Contents
Preface
History of the common human
Why of History
The restrictor
The rebel
Love and Unity
Free-Will/Choice and Division
Societies
Political Parties
We are all ONE
Love without free-will is not love
Free-will without love is not free-will
Suffering
Personal Salvation: Free-Will = Love
Change
Today's World
Modern Freedom = Development = The American Dream
Human Rights
Survival of the Fittest
Justice
Religion: Ideology vs. Experience
The Amusement Park
Attaining Love
The Tree
References
Preface
It is not me who has an idea. It is not me who writes.
It is not me who lives.
We all contribute to every artistic creation.
We all contribute to every piece of literature.
We all walk in every one else's footsteps.
We all contribute to everything that exists.
for we walk in unity despite our efforts not to.
Take heed...
for nothing has been said that has not been said before and
nothing has been thought of
that has not been thought of before.
Original thought only exists in the world of academics,
but not in the world of the mind and of the soul of humankind.
for all things have already been known,
and all things have already come to pass.
History of the common human
Way back when, when human beings first started out... we
lived in tribes numbering anywhere from 10 to 30 people. We
hunted and gathered in order to survive. We were generally
isolated from most other hunter-gatherer groups. We were a
self-sufficient group. We traveled nomadically from area to area
in order to hunt and gather more efficiently. We were one big
family in the sense that we all interacted on a daily basis. If we
wanted to leave our tribe and run off into the sunset by
ourselves, we couldn't because of our physical dependence on
the tribe to survive. We needed the tribe for protection, food,
and shelter. There are many debates as to whether tribal life as
it existed thousands of years ago was an overall happy life
where working hours were short and leisure hours long or
whether the opposite was true. We will not go into this question
at the moment. For now, let's just concentrate on what we know
as historical fact. And what we do know is best summarized as
follows:
Economic Activity: Hunter/Gatherer
Tribe was self-sufficient
Individuals depended on the Tribe for survival
For thousands and thousands of years, the tribal unit was our
only mode of social organization.
Change, oh yes, what a word, what an idea. What happened to
our lonely tribes of antiquity? Where did change step in and
decide that the future would differ from thousands of years of
apparent continuity?
We begin to invent things. Technology is introduced into our
world. Our economic activity slowly begins to change from
hunter-gathering to agriculture-herding.
There are many theories as to the reason why we begin to
change, one of the most popular ones being the Population
Pressure Theory developed by Mark Cohen in 1977. His theory
rests on the idea that population growth and subsequent
population pressure were the main factors that increased the use
of agricultural technologies (Sanderson 1995:35-36). We are
not going to concentrate on the reasons why agriculture-herding
came about, but on how it changed our lives.
With the advent of agriculture-herding technology our system of
social organization begins to change. We remain more
sedentary and less nomadic. We choose to remain in one
location for longer periods of time. We no longer need to chase
our prey or migrate with climate changes. We can grow our
own food and raise our own livestock.
This new form of technology also brought about the existence of
larger settlements (towns and villages) as opposed to isolated
tribal units. Towns and villages were, for the most part, more
numerous in population than tribes.
Another change brought about by agriculture-herding
technology was the reduction in size of our basic social unit, or
household unit. The household unit of a society is commonly
defined as, "groups of individuals living together under a
common roof and sharing a variety of tasks" (Eder 1999:11).
When tribes were the only form of social organization in human
societies, they were in a sense the household unit. As permanent
settlements began to prop up, villages began to be edified, and
with it came the possibility of living in smaller household units.
As individuals became less dependent upon the larger tribal units
for survival, they slowly dissipated and the rise of the new basic
social unit of society began to appear more and more frequently
- the family. The family was less numerous than the tribe. The
family was not a self-contained unit and depended upon a larger
social system in order to survive. This larger social system was
the town/village in which they lived. They depended on a larger
social structure because of the rise in specialization and the
division of labor. Members of a town became specialists and
ith the products/services they produced
they bartered or traded for the items which they lacked.
Therefore, families became more dependent upon the macro
social unit in which they lived. During the next few thousands
of years, not only do we see an increase in the size of
settlements, but we see an increase in the size of organized
political units referred to as nation-states, empires, and
dynasties.
Agriculture-Grazing brought:
Change from Nomadic life to Permanent Settlements
Increase in size of settlements - From Tribes to
Towns/Villages/Cities
Increase in size of political units - From Tribes to
Nation-States/Empires
Decreased dependence upon the Micro Social Unit
(Tribe), which resulted in a decrease in the size of
households (basic social units) - From Tribe to Family
Increase in specialization/division of labor which
resulted in an increased dependence upon the Macro
Social Unit (Town/Village or Nation-State)
As time passed, we saw the spread of agricultural-grazing
technology throughout most of the world, leaving a minority of
societies that relied exclusively on hunter-gatherer technology
for their subsistence. Agricultural-Grazing technology first
started about 10,000 years ago and was the prevalent form of
subsistence technology until the later part of the 2nd Millennium
(between 17th Century - late 18th Century) when the Industrial
Revolution began in Europe. Many of the same changes that
took place during the Agricultural-Grazing Revolution took
place during the Industrial Revolution. The size of the
settlements increased from small cities to Mega Urban
Metropolis'. With the introduction of wage-labor in urban
cities, the family no longer was necessary in order to survive.
Because of this, during the next few hundred years and even
today, we have been witness to the decrease in size of the basic
social unit in our society. During the industrial age the
individual has replaced the family as the basic unit within
society. We have seen the rise of the importance of the
individual as opposed to the family in the past few hundred
years. This is reflected within our most prevalent forms of
economic and political systems today, which are democracy and
capitalism respectively.
Industrialization brought:
Increase in size of settlements - From
Town/Villages/Cities to Mega Urban Centers
Decreased dependence upon the Micro Social Unit
(Family) which resulted in a decrease in the size of
households - From large families to small families or
individuals.
Increase in specialization/division of labor which
resulted in an increased dependence upon the Macro
Social Unit (Nation-State).
Why of History
We have just taken a brief look at how our household units have
changed in the past few thousands of years. The constitution of
the household unit plays a big role in the life of common
everyday human beings. The history of our household units has
been largely ignored by historians. Yet, what people usually
remember in their lives are the people that they were closest to
on a daily basis. Today, that usually implies their immediate
family members. When we are on our death beds, we will
usually not think of our political leaders, our countries, or the
economic systems in which we live under. Yet history, as
taught to us today, is a constant reflection of these facts that the
common individual has always been less interested in. When
we look at the history of the common person through time, we
must look at how the basic social units have changed throughout
time and what effect this has had upon the common person as
well as the effect it has had in molding our social, economic,
political, and religious systems. The great empires, ideologies,
kings, and presidents of history are soon forgotten by the
common individual for little do they contribute to our most
fundamental objectives in life.
The natural question that arises when viewing the natural
progression of our basic social units, is why? Why did our
tribes dissipate into smaller numbering family units as
agriculture/herding technologies became more prevalent and as
our villages became larger? Why have our family units been
dwindling in size ever since the beginning of the industrial
revolution? The natural answer to these questions is that it has
been our will to do so. Today we don't need to live more
isolated than we ever have in the history of humankind, but for
some reason, we want to. Whenever the necessity of unified
household units has dissipated, so have the household units...
into smaller units. Physical necessity once again plays a central
role in maintaining the unity of the remaining smaller micro
units, until the lone individual remains. Necessity has been the
backbone of the unity of our household units. History has
shown that without necessity, we don't seem to want to remain
under the same household. Why? Wouldn't it seem natural for
us to live in larger households in today's society, especially with
all of our economic concerns?
The answer to this question lies in one word - choice. We much
rather live alone with choice than unified with others with less
choice. Why have we chosen to take such a path throughout
history? Because, as we have seen, this is not a phenomenon of
the last few centuries, this is a phenomenon that has taken place
since the beginnings of technology. In our world of micro
households, why have we run away from each other for
thousands of years? Despite our apparent social necessity of
people, we continue to run away from each other on a household
level. What is the cause of such division? Why have we
declared war on each other and opted to live more and more
isolated lives as history unfolds?
Before answering these questions, we are going to look at a
parallel historical event to the history of human beings. This
parallel historical event is the story of the first television sets in
history. When TV's first appeared in the world, they were hard
to come by. Usually only one family in any given neighborhood
could afford one. Therefore, we saw community gatherings
where people would sit around and watch television together.
Communities all over the world would convene to watch
television. Then, as televisions became more accessible to
people's budgets, more and more people began to buy their own
television sets. As this happened, the community gatherings
became less common and today we rarely see large groups
gather to watch television. Some people even have one
television set per bedroom in their homes with each person in
the household watching their own programs separately. This
story seems to be in direct parallel with the evolution of basic
household units throughout history: tribe --> family -->
individual. As the necessity to remain together as a unified
group dissipated, so did the unity of the group.
It is apparent that the reason why people watch television in
their own homes, as opposed to getting together with a group to
watch television, is that alone we have more choices presented
to us. We prefer individual choice over unity. What dynamic
has caused people to grow apart from each other? What have
we done to cause people in modern times to isolate them selves
with greater frequency?
In order to answer these questions, we must look into the
dynamics of any social group for observable patterns of
behavior that lead to division and strife amongst the group.
Within any group, rules are established in order for harmony and
peaceful co-existence to prevail. Also, within any group we will
have people who disagree with the established rules and wish to
change the status quo. Throughout history, we see a constant
battle between these two factions - restrictors and rebels.
The Restrictor
The restrictor is somebody who wants to establish certain rules
upon a group of people and/or wants everybody to uphold the
established traditional rules of a society. Restrictors feel a need
to control themselves as well as others by establishing or
upholding certain rules for people to follow. Their intentions
are usually noble for they desire the unity of the group under an
established set of rules. They are elated when people come
together, but are usually hard on the deviants from the
established set of rules - imposing punishments on them or at
least thinking that this should happen.
The Rebel
The rebel, on the other hand, is somebody who goes against the
established rules. Rebels feel a need to not be controlled by
others and therefore are constantly opposed to the established
ways. They do not want restrictions placed upon their behavior
in any way. More than group unity, they value their freedom to
choose for themselves.
The battle between these two groups has been raging for
thousands of years. Each individual has a bit of both in their
personalities, but some tend to be more of one than the other.
In order to better understand these two factions within any given
population as well as within our own psyche, we must go deeper
into the motivations behind our actions. What motivates
restrictors to behave the way they do? What are they seeking?
What motivates the rebels? What force is guiding their ways?
Sometimes it seems as if restrictors and rebels are two different
species that evolved from different planets. Their mindsets are
so different from each other. Yet, the reality is that these two
very distinct prototypical beings can be raised with identical
surroundings and environmental conditions but end up with
apparently completely different mind sets and objectives. What
forces are behind them? What forces are behind us? What
forces make us tick throughout our lives? What forces compel
human beings to passion and change? Change usually implies
discontentment and dissatisfaction with the present and with the
established. Change implies a reach for some objective in our
lives. Why do we change? What are we pursuing when we
change?
Our first spiritual statement is...
There are 2 fundamental spiritual forces:
Love and Free-Will
Love and Unity
We have all heard of this word a thousand times... the unifying
force of the universe. It is the force of compassion and
selflessness. When we think of love, we think of treating
everyone as if they were our most cherished possession. We
think of everyone as our brothers and sisters. We think of the
love a mother or father has for their children. They will do
anything for their children, even if it means giving up their own
lives for them. A feeling that goes beyond self-interest; we
think of the other person as opposed to ourselves. We give up
our own selves for the good of others.
Free-Will/Choice and Division
We have all heard of this word as well... the divisionary force of
the universe. When we think of free-will, we think of doing
anything we want to do at any given time. We think that we are
free to do whatever we want to do all the time. Unlimited free-will
would be such that when we simply imagine something
with our will, this would immediately become a reality. The
essence of free-will lies in the word choice. We always want to
choose our own path in life. We feel like distinct individuals
from everyone else. We have an identity and we always want to
be honest with ourselves by choosing what is right for us. We
don't want to be forced to do things.
In their purest form of being, restrictors are enamored with love
and despise free-will. They see free-will as the enemy of love.
On the other hand, rebels are enamored with free-will and
despise love. They see love as the enemy of free-will.
Restrictors force love without allowing for free-will. Rebels
force free-will without allowing for love. You can see what
kind of a battle ensues amongst these two prototypes.
We can see positives and negatives from both restrictors and
rebels:
Positives:
Restrictors - Show love to many people. Promote a strong sense
of community with strong traditional values giving a strong
sense of purpose to people. Promote a homogeneous population
which intern creates strong interpersonal relationships.
Rebels - Promotes creativity, expression, independence, and
individuality.
Negatives:
Restrictors - Believe in love without free-will. The love they
show to many is conditional - they expect others to act as they
do. They only give to those who they are in favor with. They
usually promote strong punishments for deviancy from the
established. They think everyone should act the correct way, the
moral way, the traditional way. And if you don't, you should be
strongly punished. This mentality stunts creativity and growth.
Rebels - Believe in free-will without love. Only think in them
selves. Always trying to prove they are free to choose. When
we simply go against the established for no real reason, we
create division and can lead to increased selfishness amongst
the population. Communities are destroyed and everyone is only
concerned about themselves. People stop trusting each other
and people begin to grow apart and don't share any common
bonds together anymore. Many times this leads to lives of
solitude and despair.
Why do they act this way?
Whatever we lack we force.
Restrictors -
If we feel a sense of rejection in our lives - we immediately feel
a lack of love and pursue this our whole lives.
If we feel a sense of choice - we immediately feel a lack of love
and pursue this our whole lives.
If we feel division - we want to unite.
Rebels -
If we feel a sense of acceptance in our lives - we immediately
feel a lack of choice and pursue this our whole lives.
If we feel a sense of incarceration - we immediately feel a lack
of choice and pursue this our whole lives.
If we feel unity - we want to divide.
This has a lot to do with relationships -
Complements attract because they innately have what the other
wants. Complements also pull apart because they innately seek
the opposite.
This is usually why 2 brothers/sisters have opposite tendencies.
The first baby becomes of a determined personality. The 2nd
baby fills the void of the first. Twins usually have different
personalities - they fill each others' void. This is true about
many different personality traits, for example, introverts and
extroverts.
Just as we can see restrictors and rebels in individual behavior,
we can also witness these same traits in societies as a whole.
Societies
Traditional societies have many positive aspects. Traditional
societies usually have very strict rules of behavior, which intern
creates very tight social bonds amongst the people within these
societies. This creates very homogeneous populations. People
think the same, act the same, have the same dreams, and believe
in the same ideals. This is what creates such a tight bond amongst
these people. Nothing is unknown. The life path for most people
is determined at birth, since gender roles, class
roles, and racial roles are all predetermined within these
societies. For many, there is a strong sense of security, stability,
and peace in this lifestyle. Everything is established. Everything is
determined. Tradition within such societies is usually not seen as
rules that must be followed, but a bonding force in which people
are proud to abide by. Tradition is accepted without much resistance
because there is very little knowledge of other forms of culture and
ways of life and because tradition works well to keep harmony
and peace amongst the community.
We begin to see signs of descent amongst traditional societies
when tradition becomes a burden on people. This is when we
begin to deny our true feelings and simply go along with the
crowd. We blindly follow what everyone else is doing which
creates an internal vacuum where we feel devoid of purpose and
meaning. When the rules of a society become so divergent from
the necessities and desires of the population, then rebellion is
inevitable. When this becomes apparent to many within the
population, rebels begin the road of "liberation" of the status
quo. Once rebellion against the established ways begins, rules
are imposed by the restrictors to conserve tradition and the
status quo. When strict rules are imposed, rebels feel even more
compelled to break the rules since their sense of choice feels
even more restraint. And as the established rules become
violated, the restrictors feel that more and more punishments
must be established to impose the traditional ways. The vicious
cycle of stricter rules from the top followed by more rebellious
behavior from the bottom begins. This creates a society of fear
where both fundamental spiritual forces - free-will and love -
become stunted. We see these two groups fighting for their own
agendas ever since the beginning of human history. The unifiers
vs. the dividers. As we can see, love and free-will battle it out
on a daily basis within our households and amongst our
societies.
We can now paint a clearer picture as to why people have grown
apart from each other. Restrictors are pulling together by force,
while the rebels are pulling apart by force. We are immersed
within a vicious cycle of unity and division, which has caused
the lone individual to surface as the product of all of this. Most
of the world's population lives in cities, yet despite living
surrounded by thousands of people, the modern western world
has brought solitude to individuals like never before. We live
more alone today with less meaningful personal relationships
than ever before. This trend will continue as long as we
continue the vicious cycle of violence amongst us, where force
is the instrument of choice whereby selfishness becomes the
ultimate result.
As we look at history we can see the trend of the diminishing
size of the household units (tribe-family-individual) as a product
of the interaction between restrictors and rebels. There is one
common element that these two individuals share - the use of
force. The need to control a particular situation is paramount for
both restrictors and rebels. Since each faction is pursuing
different objectives their forces counterbalance each other
creating apparent stability within a dynamic system. The
ultimate problem is the product that this type of society creates.
As mentioned the product of these interactions is a selfish
individual, who feels the necessity to control and use force to
attempt to achieve some type of peace and meaning within their
lives. The common denominator between restrictors and rebels
is their persistent use of force, which provides the reason why
many rebels become restrictors and many restrictors become
rebels. We can even be rebels in some aspects of our lives and
restrictors in others. Let's take a look at our political parties for
some simple examples within our society.
Political Parties
Within the United States we see definite tendencies amongst
political parties that define them as rebels or restrictors. For the
most part, as mentioned, we have chosen the path of choice over
the path of love for most of our history.
Republicans
Economic Rebels - Less control from the power structures in
place, more individual choice (less taxes, laissez-faire).
They think that the economy as a whole will be better off if less
money is given to the government, giving people more choice
over what to do with their own money. With the overall
increase in economic growth everyone in society benefits, even
the poorest segments of the population.
Moral Restrictors - Less individual choice, more control from
the power structures in place (pro-life on abortion, gay rights)
They think they are being better people by supporting anti-
abortion laws and anti-gay laws. Their moral beliefs, usually
founded within religion, are trying to establish a model for how
the world should look... and enforcing this model.
Democrats
Economic Restrictors - More control from the power structures
in place, less individual choice (more taxes, greater public
programs).
They think they are being better people by supporting an
increase in government spending on social programs for the
economically less fortunate people of the population.
Moral Rebels - Less control from the power structures in place,
more individual choice (pro-choice on abortion, gay rights).
They think that individual choice in this area is a basic human
right.
This is just an example of how the divide between restrictors
and rebels is not necessarily a divide amongst the population,
since most people are both restrictors and rebels simultaneously
and switch to one or the other depending on what issue they
wish to address. More than a divide amongst the population,
this division represents a divide within ourselves that we all
struggle with on a daily basis. Shall we go down the road of
choice or shall we go down the road of love? We are always at
a cross-road.
We are all ONE
If love and choice are the 2 forces that drive humanity
throughout history, then why have we gone down the road of
choice over the road of love as seen through the diminishing size
of household units?
We have heard from modern physics and from all of the
religious gurus of the past that humanity is all one. We are all
part of an organism which is the organism of human beings on
earth. Not only that, but we are all part of the larger organisms
of nature and the universe. But for now, we will not expand that
far out. Let us concentrate on human beings. Let us concentrate
on Humanity. Humanity is one. We all share a common bond.
The bond that we share is our common destiny and our common
past. Everyone living today is a product of our past. All of the
atrocities as well as all the marvels the world has witnessed have
formed who we are today. We are all products of our past and
we all share a common destiny for we are all headed in one
direction as a unit. The deeper reason why we share a common
past and a common future is that we share common desires and
common necessities. We all want the same thing. We all want
the same thing because the engulfing organism of humanity
which we live in wants this same thing. What do we all want in
our lives? We all want choice and we all want love. This is
common to all cultures and societies no matter how
technologically primitive or advanced.
Humanity grows and develops just as one human being grows
and develops throughout their lifetime. The only difference is
that the time span that it takes for one human being to develop is
far less than the time span it takes for humanity to develop. The
course of development of one human being is similar to the
course of development of humanity. Therefore, if we take a
look at the course of development of one human being, we can
see how that particular individual passes through many different
stages. When a baby is born it is very dependent upon its
parents. It is always close to its parents and needs of them to
meet the basic necessities of life. As children grow older they
are in a constant process of discovery and exploration of life.
They become less dependent and need less of their parents. As
teenagers, the need to somehow break away physically and
emotionally from their parents is apparent. The need to
establish identity and become independent in thought is real in
every teenager. The rebellious nature of teenagers is not a
cultural phenomenon, since it happens in every culture.
Just as the rebel throughout history, the child feels a sense of
incarceration and therefore, they immediately feel a lack of
choice and pursue this during the stage of adolescence. They
feel attached to their parents and therefore want to divide. They
feel unity and therefore want division.
Just as children and adolescents seek choice and individuality,
humanity has done the same. We have been in search of
ourselves for thousands of years. We are in the midst of an
adolescent age of humanity, for we are still in the rebellious
stage where choice is preferred over love. We are still very
much attracted to choice rather than to love. Yet, keep in mind
that love is where we come from... for a rebel comes from unity
and therefore seeks division... comes from acceptance and
therefore chooses division. We are endowed with love and
therefore we seek choice.
Since we are well aware of the stages of development of one
human being, we can also look into the future of humanity and
see what awaits us. Yet, as we all know, the life of one
individual can end up in many places depending on the decisions
we choose to make. Therefore, our future is still awaiting the
choices we make in our lives to form the future of our specie.
Therefore, the future is wide open. Yet, knowledge of who we
are and what we seek will better help us understand where we
are going. Who are we? What do we seek? If we are one
humanity, why are there 2 seemingly opposite fundamental
spiritual forces and not just one unified force? Why do we
always seem to be at conflict with each other?
In order to answer these questions, we must state the following
spiritual reality:
Love without free-will is not love
Free-will without love is not free-will
Until we understand these statements, we will never understand
the fundamental forces of the universe. Free-will and Love are
one and the same. One can't exist without the other.
Love without free-will is not love
This is very apparent to all of us. A robot can't love because it
doesn't have free-will. By the same token, love can never be
forced. If it doesn't come from the natural feelings deep inside
of an individual it will never be love. You can never force
someone to love and no one can force you to love.
Free-will without love is not free-will
This concept is a little harder for us to comprehend. But, the
main idea behind this is that love grants you freedom to do
whatever you want. Without love we are trapped behind the
doors of fear. You will notice that if you approach life
situations with love, the doors will be opened to you, but if you
approach situations with selfishness, the doors will be closed to
you. Selfishness is bread from fear and people sense this and
run from it. Let us look into this concept a little deeper.
When we choose to love we become free. Does this statement
make sense? If we choose to love, then aren't we sort of forced
to choose one particular path in life? Does this really feel like
freedom to us? No, it does not. And within these questions lie
the great questions of humankind. Our thoughts generally tell us
that freedom is when we can do whatever we want to do, not
when we need to choose a particular path in life in order to
become free. But, the great paradox in life is this one. We can
do whatever we want to do when we first choose to love
ourselves and the world. But, then we might argue against this
point saying that we can't do whatever we want to do because
then we can't choose to hate our neighbor if we so choose to
because this would be contradictory to love. So, we must
understand that we are always free to choose in this world,
always, but we are not free to control the effect of the choices
we make. So you are free to throw a rock into a pond of water,
but you are not free to control the ripple effect that you created
in the water once your rock hit the surface of the water.
Similarly, if you choose to hate your neighbor, you can do so,
but you are not free to control the effect that this will have on
yourself and on your neighbor. In other words, we are not free
to hate and feel good about hating because we are all bound by
the laws of suffering.
Suffering
Nobody wants to suffer. Even masochists don't suffer on
purpose because they feel this will make them suffer less.
The law of suffering is:
We will suffer unless we unify our 2 grandest spiritual forces
that lie within all of us: free-will and love.
If free-will and love are divided, we will suffer and we will
always look for ways not to suffer. Therefore, our destiny
becomes solidified from the beginning. Suffering becomes a
blessing in disguise... like a compass to the seaman and a
lighthouse to the ship at sea. Without it, we would never arrive
at our destination. So, don't ignore suffering. Listen to
suffering. It is here to help us find the right way, the straight
way, the way that was meant for each of us from the very
beginning.
So, the law of suffering acknowledges that we are incarcerated
in this life. Why? Because nobody wants to suffer. We will
suffer unless we unify our 2 grandest spiritual forces. Therefore,
we are forced to choose a pre-determined path in life if we want
to avoid suffering. But, we are always free to remain in
suffering. But, since nobody wants this, we are destined to not
suffer. Therefore, every person's individual destiny and
therefore humanity's destiny becomes the unification of choice
and love.
The happy part of this whole story is that once we unify our two
grandest spiritual forces, we truly can do whatever we want.
And when we reach our point of unification we won't want to do
certain things that we wanted to do before. Yet, we will want to
do so much more... for the unification of the spirit is a point of
discovery in our lives and therefore the magic only begins. The
unification of the spirit is the beginning and not the end... When
we choose to view ourselves and the world with unlimited love,
we rid ourselves of fear, and this is when our free-will really
becomes unleashed because there is nothing to worry about.
Therefore, going back to the historical trend of choice over
unity, we can answer the following questions: When will we
stop choosing choice over unity? When will we stop running
away from each other? We will stop doing this when we realize
that love is the answer, the only fundamental answer. Until we
choose to follow the path of love, we will remain incarcerated
by the chains of duality. It is the unity of free-will and love
which makes us whole, for they are one, for neither one of them
is complete without the other... and their division causes all of
our suffering. This division represents an internal conflict and
therefore becomes an external conflict.
Therefore, when we look at the battles that rage amongst human
beings and within ourselves... restrictors against rebels... rebels
against restrictors... restrictors against restrictors... rebels
against rebels... we get a feeling that people are always doing
what they think is best. all the time. People always follow
their instincts in life. People don't do things in order to bring
about more pain on them selves. Some people might engage in
behavior that brings about more pain to their lives, but only
because they think that it will bring them less suffering. It is
never a question of will. It is always a question of knowledge.
Nobody likes to suffer. Nobody likes pain. Therefore, the
pursuit of knowledge becomes a key ingredient to the
unification of the spirit. The more we know, the closer we are to
always choosing to love the world and ourselves, and therefore,
the less we suffer.
People are always following at least one of the fundamental
spiritual forces, for this is what we all want. But, when we
follow only one of these forces and not both of them combined,
it is as if we are not pursuing any of them. It is an all or nothing
phenomenon. This is why people are so confused about love
and about free-will. You can't reap the benefits of love unless
you allow free-will. Likewise, you can't reap the benefits of
free-will unless love is present.
The mere force in which we see people seeking what their hearts
tell them is very uplifting for our outlook on our future. We live
in a world where everything is done by force. People force the
ideas of love and unity on others, on society in general, and
upon themselves. On the other hand, people also force free-will
and choice on others, on society in general, and upon
themselves. And it is this behavior that shows us that people are
attempting to do the right thing. So, our intentions always seem
to be in the right place, yet the outcome always seems to come
out negative. This is because force always creates the need for
more force. Force takes us further away from where we want to
be. And when we get further and further away from where we
want to be, we always attempt to force even more every
situation and experience we encounter. This creates a perpetual
cycle of force that never seems to end.
Not only do we see this in our modern world, but we see it in
our individual lives. Forcing what is not there is detrimental to
our spiritual development. This leads us into our next spiritual
statement:
Don.t force what is not.
Don.t restrict what is.
BE what is
And what remains when everything is removed? Love and Free-
Will.
So, how do we move toward unity in a world of division?
The answer is always love. But, what does this mean?
Personal Salvation: Free-Will = Love
Here we begin to look into the idea of personal salvation in our
individual lives. Personal Salvation is to be at peace with
yourself and the world. Personal Salvation is freedom from
enduring suffering.
All religions teach of a path to achieve personal salvation.
Salvation from what? Salvation from suffering. Suffering is the
state of lack, of division, of necessity. Suffering exists so that
we are obliged to be who we really are. If suffering didn't exist,
I would be very pessimistic about the future of human beings,
for there would be no incentive to progress spiritually. The fact
that we don't want to suffer guarantees our personal salvation.
Suffering guarantees our personal salvation. We are always
looking for ways to relieve our suffering. This is why force can
be seen with hope and not with pessimism, because force is a
sign of our failed attempts at achieving personal salvation. The
only reason why force continues to prevail is because we have
not developed enough knowledge to realize that force will only
create more suffering.
Suffering is also a testament as to the validity of the force of
love being the essence of our being. When we are away from
love, we suffer. When we are with love, we are not suffering.
Probably the most painful emotional experience of any person's
life is to loose a loved one... be it a son, daughter, father,
mother, brother, or sister. It is so hard because the separation
from this unity is lost. This is a testament as to our true essence.
It is also a testament as to the destiny of humankind. We are
destined to love, because we will not endure suffering eternally.
We will eventually come to the realization of how to rid
ourselves of suffering. The unity with the whole will allow us to
do this.
Personal Salvation: Free-will = Love
The concept that most of us are missing in today's day in age is
the combination of these two concepts. As we have mentioned
earlier, we all practice love without free-will as well as free-will
without love. Therefore, by definition, we are not practicing
free-will and we are not practicing love... since
Love without free-will is not love
Free-will without love is not free-will
When we go back to the historical evolution of basic social
units, we come back to the question, how are we going to
reverse the cycle of choice over unity? How are we going to
begin the path of unity without giving up our freedom? We can
only look at the concept of Love=Free-will to answer this
question. When we choose to love, we will be on our way to
experiencing a revolutionary turn in the history of humankind.
But humanity is very confused about what this whole concept
means.
Change
The path that the world is presently on is not conducive to this
transformation in society. So, how do we change the path that
we are on? How do we change the world? We are very focused
on producing changes within our social systems in order to
change the world. But, the only way to change any human
system is to change the individuals within the system. This will
change the system. If we first try to change the system and
thereby try to reach the individual, we will fail.
Individual --> Change of Individual --> Change in System
The traditional thought process behind any attempted changes
generated within modern society is shown as follows:
System --> Change of System --> Change in Individual
We think that by changing the economic, political, and social
systems in place, we are going to cause a change in the system
as a whole thereby creating changes in the population. But, the
opposite is true. The system is a direct effect of what the
individuals within the system are. Apples don't grow on orange
trees. The summation of states of being of each individual
within a particular society creates a system that reflects these
states of being. Not only do our individual states of being create
our systems, but they also create our leaders.
People often look at our leaders as somehow independent from
society. But, just as our social systems are reflections of who
we are, the same principle applies to our leaders. It is very
important for us to understand that our leaders are a reflection of
who we are. The problem with forceful overthrows (or peaceful
transitions) of power has always been the same: who is going to
replace the overthrown government? Oranges will always be
replaced with oranges.
The only way to change our leaders or any of our economic,
political, and/or social systems in place is to first start by
changing ourselves. This is the only thing we can do to change
the system. It seems like an impossible task... to change our
own individual selves and then to think that this small change
will have some type of effect upon the whole system. And then
to think that everyone in the world is going to go through a
similar personal transformation than the one I will go
through... It seems like this can never be achieved. But, it will
be achieved because change doesn't cooperate with other
methods. Therefore, we will cooperate with change.
By choosing love today, we will begin to build a city of lights
that no one ever thought possible. By choosing love today, we
will begin to construct something that previous generations
would have thought of as impossible. But don't do it to change
the world, don't do it to change the system, don't do it to change
our leaders, do it for yourself... for when you choose to love the
world, you are not fulfilling some utopian ideal, you are really
achieving true happiness for you in your life today. Don't do it
for anyone else, do it for you, do it for your children, do it for
your parents, do it for your friends. You deserve it and so do
they. The rest will happen naturally.
As we change individually, we will motivate others around us to
do the same, and the changes in government policy will come
automatically, without force. The changes in the systems we
have set up will shortly follow. True power is truly in each
individual's hands. The government has absolutely no control
over your state of being. Neither do the economic, political, or
religious systems we live under. Neither do any of the living
conditions we live in. No matter how bad you think your
situation is, you are always free to choose love, and by doing
this you will become free. This is where true freedom lies.
We always tend to blame everyone and everything else for the
state of affairs in our world today. We blame the government
for many of our problems. We blame our senators for other
problems. We blame the criminals on the streets for yet other
problems we have. We blame the police for yet other problems
we have. We blame our neighbors for yet other problems we
have. We blame our kids and our parents for yet other problems
we have. But, we never look toward ourselves for some type of
answer to our problems. But, this is the only place where we
will find the answer.
We must place responsibility directly on ourselves for all of our
problems, not because we are to blame, but because in our own
hands we have the answers to overcome all of our problems.
When we begin to play the blame game we are never going to
win. When we play the blame game we are giving the power of
the universe which we all posses to others. When we play the
blame game we become impotent. When we play the blame
game we become useless beings. When we play the blame
game we become observers of a world we don't like and can't do
anything about. When you blame others for your problems or
our world's problems, you give others power over you. To
blame is to divide... and continue to remain tied within the
chains of duality.
From all of this we can make the following statement: If the
answer for our individual happiness and freedom lies within
ourselves, then how can we think that the answers to society and
the world lie somewhere outside of each individual person?
Societies and Nation-States don't exist on their own. They are
only the summation of states of being of the individuals that
reside within them. Thus, how can we think that answers will
come through policy decisions? through governmental
structures? through economic systems that have been
established over the years? through political systems that have
been set up over the years? We can't possibly think that by
changing a law or a policy within a particular country we will be
any better or worse off. Those are things that have absolutely no
control over the outcome of our states of being. But, all of these
things are determined by our states of being. We confuse cause
and effect! Every single one of us forms policy. Every single
movement you make. Every single gesture you make on the
street. Every single social interaction you have with people.
Every single thought that you have while sleeping. Everything
you do is a constant creation of your individual world, which
intern is creating our world as a whole. Policy doesn't make us.
Therefore, we can never blame policy. Even if we do change
the policy, we will always stay the same... unless we change
individually.
A perfect example of this is the social, political, and economic
experiment of the Soviet Union. Marx once had a vision for the
world. He had a vision of a utopian world. He wanted to
change the world to a better place. But, his solution consisted of
changing the system. He said that if we changed the economic
and political system in place at the time, we could all live in
harmony with each other. But, the system that was in place was
a reflection of the people of the times. To force a new system
would have no effect upon the fulfillment of the individuals
within that particular society. An effect can't change a cause.
Only a cause can change an effect.
Today's World
What type of system do we live under in today's world?
Modern Freedom = Development = The American Dream
Not surprisingly, the current world system is dominated by the
word "freedom". What is freedom for modern society? We
have been deceived by the word freedom. We have been
deceived by the word choice. How? Why do we always hear of
the word "freedom" on the news, from our leaders, in our
political constitutions, and from our economic forefathers?
What "freedom" are they referring to?
Modern Political and economic systems are based on the ideal of
freedom. They are based on this ideal because of the simple fact
that people all over the world want the freedom to choose. This
is one of our 2 deepest desires in life, the other one being love.
Also keep in mind why we are so enamored with choice over love.
The stage of development of humanity is in an adolescent stage
and therefore is mainly focused on division, choice, and independence.
In our political systems, most of the countries in the world live
under some type of democratic government. There are still
many societies that do not practice democracy, but the trend is
always moving in this general direction. This particular system
gives people the right to vote for their leaders. The tendency of
most democracies is to share the ideal of equality, which
primarily means non-discrimination of people based on race,
religion, or gender. Another parallel ideal to equality is human
rights. In the past few hundred years around the world we have
seen the rise of minority groups proclaiming their "human
rights" to equality. This movement arose due to the fact that
many minority groups didn't share many of the same new found
freedoms that other citizens of modern countries enjoyed. The
Bill of Rights in the United States, for example, granted
individuals certain freedoms protected by the power of the
government, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion,
and freedom to bear arms, etc. Back then, when the Bill first
came out, these were rights that were only granted to certain
people depending on many of their characteristics such as race
and gender. In the United States today these freedoms are
shared by most all people under the law. In the political realm,
the ideals of equality and basic human rights for all people are
the base of this proclamation of freedom.
In our economic systems, most of the countries in the world live
under some type of capitalistic system. Likewise, there are still
some societies that do not practice capitalism, but the trend is
always moving in this general direction. This particular system
believes in private property and a free market system. Just like
the political ideals we mentioned, these economic ideals are the
base of this modern proclamation of freedom.
In a nutshell, the modern model of progress which encompasses
political, economic, and social systems can be seen in action
around the world in one word: development. This is synonymous
with modernization of all of our human systems on a world scale.
And this is happening as we speak. Development is happening
around the world. Human development, in a nutshell, is simply
defined by the United Nations as, "a process of enlarging choices"
(Arab Human Development Report 2002:15). This is the objective
of development. This is why development is spreading so rapidly.
People are not only drawn in to this process but are in fact the
creators of this process since they are always seeking to "enlarge
choice" all the time. Remember that development does not create
people, people create development. Development does not exist
by itself. It is only as good as the desires that sustain the process
which it attempts to fulfill. We are always in command.
The decisions that we have made on a personal level within our
basic social units throughout history have created the political,
economic, and social systems that exist today. Our historical
decisions on a household level and our systems on a world-wide
scale reflect the ideal of choice. Yet, as we have mentioned...
Love without free-will is not love
Free-will without love is not free-will
Has our historical decision of choice been inclusive of love? Or
exclusive of love?
Are we choosing to love or are we loving without choosing and
choosing without loving?
Many people seem to be stuck between their political/economic
ideals and their religious ideals. Many people believe one thing
on the Sabbath and in their prayers, yet believe the exact
opposite in their lives as citizens of a particular nation. Religion
attempts to satisfy one of our 2 fundamental spiritual forces -
love. Most religions attempt to instill the values of compassion,
love, and forgiveness in people's lives. This is why religion has
not gone away. On the other hand, our political and economic
ideals are very different. These try to instill the other
fundamental spiritual force - choice. Freedom of choice, human
rights, and equality are all ideals that are politically and
economically driven.
We support war. We support punishment against deviants in
society. We support the laws of the land. We support these
ideas as citizens of a particular nation. We support these ideas
because we believe in freedom, human rights, and equality. Yet,
these ideas are usually contradictory to what we believe in on
the Sabbath. War is against love. Punishment for deviants is
against forgiveness. The law of God is usually in conflict with
the laws of the land. So, as believers in God, and as a church
going population, we do the next best thing: we love some of
our neighbors, we forgive some of our neighbors, and we show
compassion for some of our neighbors... the good ones. The
bad ones must be dealt with appropriately. We justify our
actions with our attempt to fulfill both spiritual forces
separately. Therefore, the end product is the politicalization of
religion. Religious ideology must justify the extreme
discrepancies between religion's objective (love) and our
economic and political objective (choice) because congregations
demand it. Therefore, we can live dual lives because nobody
says anything. We can be fervent believers in religion and at the
same time be fervent believers in the political and economic
ideals of the modern western world.
Therefore, humanity is stuck in duality. We are trying to meet
both of our fundamental spiritual forces, but we forget that they
have to be combined to be successful. You can't serve two
masters. This shows us how we are in search of 2 separate
objectives and not only one. But this is the great illusion. It is
only one. What we think of as separate has actually always been
one. Duality keeps us in prison. Unity is the only way out. And
since we are stuck in duality, in order to achieve both of our
objectives, we must use force to accomplish both of them.
A typical example of acting in duality and not in unity is our
treatment of deviants in society. How do we treat people within
our country and amongst nations who violate the established
laws in place? We have a moral dilemma. We have to fulfill
our desire for choice, but at the same time we feel obliged to
fulfill our desire for love. How do we do it? We can't, unless
free-will = love. And since in our present stage of human
development we value choice over love, we call out for freedom.
Therefore, when a criminal kills a person on the street, we
immediately call out to protect our freedom to live in a secure
place. My rights, my freedom, and my choice is the supreme
order in modern society... as opposed to my love, my
compassion, and my forgiveness.
Another typical example of acting in duality and not in unity is
our modern outlook on war. When a nation invades another
nation, we immediately call out to protect the freedom of the
people of the nation being over-taken. Once again, we have a
moral dilemma. We have to fulfill our desire for choice, but at
the same time we feel obliged to fulfill our desire for love. How
do we do it? We can't, unless free-will = love. Similarly, when
a person suffers abuse from another person, we immediately call
out for the protection of the individual being abused. My rights,
my freedom, and my choice is the supreme order in modern
society... as opposed to my love, my compassion, and my
forgiveness. Therefore, the invaders and abusers are killed or
incarcerated for their actions.
Human Rights
In modern society, many people have many rights. This is the
nature of the discourse of modern "freedom". We all have rights
as individuals. Let's go back and look at the diminishing size of
our basic social units throughout history. We elected choice
over unity for many reasons, but one of these reasons was
because our rights were being violated and therefore, we elected
our individual choice of division over unity. We elected to stop
watching TV together in community because as time passed
each of us had the right to view the channel that each of us chose
to watch. Before, we never had the right to do so. Why do we
demand to have human rights? What do rights do to us?
What happens to a society where people have too many rights?
When individuals within a society have too many rights, they
loose power over their own spiritual development. Therefore,
this society turns against each other because my right is always
an obstacle to your rights. My right to speak my mind is your
right to live in a place free of profanity. My right to communicate
a message to the world via television commercials is your right to
air only what you want aired on your television station. My right
to have a party in my house with loud music is your right to have
a good night sleep. My right to not cut my grass in my front yard
is your right to maintain your property value. My right to own a
gun is your right to live in a place where weapons don't exist.
We must understand one fundamental thing about rights:
We only have one human right:
The right to choose to love
This is our only inherent right
This is our only inherent right because we don't require of any
external circumstances to realize this right. All that is required
is our free-will. And while we are living on this earth we always
have our free-will. Every other right that we think we are entitled to
debilitates our mission, instead of strengthening it. By demanding
situations and circumstances that are out of our
control, we debilitate our ability to reach our personal salvation.
Our struggle for human rights has brought more division than
unity. To force human rights is to force love. Human rights can't
come from a law, it must come from within, without requiring of
a law. The human rights movements of all minority groups around
the world have done nothing to improve minority's states of being.
Instead of pursuing true salvation, we pursue modern salvation, which
is the promise of capitalism and democracy, which is encompassed
within the American dream and the discourse of development.
Why do we pursue the American dream so vehemently? Once
again we must go back to the historical trend of human history.
We are in a rebellious stage in our development. We are
rebelling because we are looking for some type of identity. We
are rebelling, just as teenagers rebel, because we want to
experiment with choice. Why is there such importance placed
on the word "freedom" in today's modern society? What are we
pursuing? What do we want and what do we lack?
Freedom, as mentioned, is basically pursuing the greatest
amount of choice to do what we want to do at any given
moment. We see money as one of the main ingredients to
achieving freedom, and hence the importance placed on
economics within the discourse of development in the modern
world. Money forms a main ingredient to achieve the American
dream. Why? The reasoning is that with money we can do
more of what we want to do. Therefore, we are more free.
Another main ingredient is human rights. The reasoning behind
human rights is that we can do more of what we want to do
without any reprimands from the law/government. For example,
freedom of speech says that you can say what you want to say
without the law putting you in jail for your ideas. But, as
mentioned, exercising my rights becomes your rights being
violated. Therefore, rights, which are suppose to bring about
more choice for a society can actually result in the opposite
effect, bringing less choice for a society.
We can clearly see this in our historical trend of human development. The progression from tribe --> family --> individual has apparently brought more choice to the individual. In modern society the individual is less dependent upon a tribe or a family for survival, and therefore, does not have to abide by the rules or traditions of them. The individual can lead the lifestyle that he/she wants to live without the burden of social restrictions from their basic social units in which they live. Yet, as choice apparently increments on the micro level it decreases for us on a macro level. In other words, we are more and more dependent upon the system in which we are immersed, and therefore, choice becomes more restrictive but these restrictions are now coming from different sources. Instead of coming from the basic social unit, it comes from the engulfing macro units in which we live under. For example, within the tribe we were dependent upon each other for food, security, and shelter. Yet, our small micro group of people did not depend on anyone else outside of our group for these basic objects necessary for survival. As technology advanced, we liberated ourselves a bit from the necessity of the tribe, but immediately tied ourselves down to the necessity of a larger settlement such as a town or a city. As specialization and division of labor occurred, we immediately became dependent upon people outside of our basic social unit for our basic necessities of food, security, and shelter. We no longer provided for all of the food we consumed; we no longer made all of our clothing; we no longer exclusively depended on our tribe for protection from foreign enemies, because now the foreign enemies were no longer small tribes, but large armies. And so we can see how independence on one front simply transferred the dependence to another front. Independence from our immediate family/tribal members brought about dependence upon the macro social system in which we lived. Today, with wage labor, we can live alone and don't have the necessity to live with a family or any other type of micro social unit. Yet, we depend on our nation-state for everything that we have. And the rules that were once governed and implemented by the tribe and the family have simply been transferred over to the government. The main idea behind this is that after thousands and thousands of years of attempting to achieve freedom, we have still not found what we are looking for. Freedom from the micro enslaves us within the macro. Freedom from the macro enslaves us within the micro. Why can't we become free? What are we lacking? Freedom does not lie exclusively in more choice...for more choice for me can equal less choice for you. But within the choice to love, more love for me equals more love for you, equals more choice for both, hence Freedom. In order to gain the world, we must give up the world. In order to be free, we must give up freedom. This is the great paradox.
Survival of the Fittest
Now, many might declare that there is nothing wrong with the
fact that more choice for me equals less choice for you. This is
survival of the fittest. I have more and therefore I am not
interested in what you have. I am better off than you and I am
going to protect what I have in order for it to remain that way.
This is the mentality many people have. Many state that this is
the way it has always been, and it will always remain this way
forever. There are two fundamental reasons why this mentality
is bound for failure. One is a practical reason and the other is a
spiritual one.
In practical and materialistic terms, we can see how, in the long
term, this mentality will fail. Supposing everyone on earth had
this mentality. If house A has more than house B, what will
house B want to do? It will want to take away from house A.
Therefore, house A must invest in security and protection in
order to keep what it has. Most of our resources in society are
used for the protection of what we have. Endless amounts of
resources are used to protect us against each other within
societies and amongst societies. Within societies, every
business must invest most of its resources on items in order to
protect against others. We protect against those that are going
to try to steel from us and we protect from those who will attempt
to sue us in the law. The amount that is spent on these two items
s unimaginable. Now, on the macro front, protection from
other countries is also a great concern, especially for wealthy
countries. They must protect their material national interests
around the world, plus they must protect their borders from
illegal immigration. Therefore, within our societies as well as
amongst societies we live in constant conflict against one
another... each trying to build up their own castle against the
interests of others...for in this model of the world apparent
economic freedom for me is slavery for you. This makes both
parties unhappy. The haves and the have-nots both live in fear.
Adam Smith, the grandfather of modern capitalism, proclaimed
that by acting in our own self-interest without any concern for
others, the whole of society would benefit. Competition would
be the driving force of the free-market system. What one
immediately learns when studying Economics is that perfect
competition doesn't exist... for it is in the self-interest of
companies to operate monopolies rather than freely compete
with other companies. Therefore, the monopolistic activities of
different industries must be regulated by the government and the
law of the land. But, as we have seen, oranges don't grow on
apple trees. Therefore, if the general population is acting in
their own self-interest and entrepreneurs are acting in their own
self-interest, then why would politicians act any differently?
Monopolies are inefficient and the trend of modern capitalism is
the expansion of monopolies in every industry. The natural
tendency of people operating under the supposition of self-interest
seeking agents is that each will attempt to get together
with other people in order to take advantage of others in order to
improve their own personal situation. Perfect competition is in
itself a contradiction because competition leads to concentrations
of power of one group over another - monopolies. Cooperation is
the only force that can sustain perfect market prices in a given
market at all times. So, at a practical level, we can see how modern
competition is detrimental to our material state of being as opposed
to cooperation. Competition brews division which brews inefficiencies.
Cooperation brews unity which brews efficiencies.
But not only is survival of the fittest detrimental to our material
state of being, but more importantly, it is detrimental to our
spiritual state of being, to our state of happiness within
ourselves. As mentioned, when we don't choose to love, we are
in constant suffering. The only way out is to choose to love. All
of these statements come back to the core law of spirituality and
of our new and upcoming science: that humanity is all one.
Therefore, we can state that:
Outside world = Inside world
Whatever you do to the outside, you do to the inside
Whatever you do to the inside, you do to the outside
Likewise,
Whatever you do to others, you do to yourself
Whatever you do to yourself, you do to others
Therefore, when our only objective in life is the realization of
the American Dream... the rise through the social class
structures until we have reached the pinnacle of what society
deems as successful, we will most likely not find anything there
to make us happy. We will have achieved so much in our lives,
yet we will never be satisfied with our achievement... and
therefore will always need more and more of the same to
attempt to fulfill our ever elusive goals in life. The destination
is not important. It is the way we play the game... for the
process is the destination. And if our process of playing the
game is survival of the fittest, then we will unknowingly attempt
to destroy ourselves and the world around us...for what we do to
the outside, we do to the inside, and what we do to others, we do
to ourselves.
Therefore, we can immediately see the spiritual development of
a nation or a particular society by looking at the least of its
citizens... for the state of being of the least of its citizens is a
direct reflection of the state of being of the highest of its
citizens. The more suffering that exists in the marginalized
segments of society are a direct reflection of the suffering that
exists in the highest segments of society. Therefore, in order to
improve the highest segments of society, we must concentrate
on improving the lowest segments of society. When I say
highest and lowest segments of society I am not referring
necessarily to material well-being... for suffering exists equally
in rich and poor neighborhoods... for the amount of wealth
accumulated has no effect on your spiritual state of being.
Justice
The more we punish others, the more we punish ourselves... and
the more we punish ourselves, the more we punish others. Our
vindictive society is stuck on punishment, because we have
punished ourselves for thousands and thousands of years. The
law of punishment is the law of fear. The only cure for the law
of fear is the law of love. The only cure for darkness is light.
When we attack fear, it causes more fear. When we attack fear,
we are attacking ourselves. When we attack ourselves, we
attack others. and when we attack others, we attack ourselves.
When you don't like something external to you, it is usually a
reflection of what you don't like about yourself, therefore, don't
attack it, but love it, because by doing so, you are loving
yourself in turn.
Why do we punish? We always hear of the word "justice" on
TV. What is this justice? What do we seek when we seek
justice? When somebody does harm to us, we suffer. When we
suffer, we want others to feel what we feel. We want equality.
This is our idea of justice. What we can't perceive is that
equality already exists. Therefore, we can say that:
Justice already exists
always
everywhere
When person A causes harm in person B, both suffer equal
punishment... for whatever you do to the outside, you do to the
inside. Therefore, justice always exists. We all receive what we
have created. Likewise, we all create what we have received.
Therefore, to punish another for punishing you is to cause
yourself even more punishment. The cycle of violence will
never cease until we bring light to darkness and love to
suffering... for suffering fought with suffering causes more
suffering, and darkness fought with darkness causes more
darkness. Love doesn't set borders or boundaries. To love is to
love everything. If you don't love everything you are not
experiencing love.
Religion: Ideology vs. Experience
If only love were that easy, we would have no problems. But, it
isn't. Why do so many religious ideologies exist? Despite our
advances in technology and science, why doesn't religion ever
go away? The simple answer is that we are still suffering.
Therefore, the next question we can ask ourselves is, what does
religion do to us that somehow appeases our suffering?
There are two facets to all religions:
Ideology: World View, Intellectual image of the past, present,
and future.
Experience: The effect religion has on our personal salvation.
There are thousands of intellectual ideologies that view the
world from a certain perspective. Christianity has one form of
viewing the world, our past, present, and future. But, even
within Christianity there are thousands of diverse ideologies.
And the same goes with every other religion on earth.
The objective of every ideology is to achieve a certain result.
The objective of every ideology is to achieve something outside
of the realm of ideology. The objective of every ideology is to
achieve a certain experience within the individuals who accept
that particular ideology. The acceptance of an ideology is
usually called belief. Belief in an ideology exists to create a
certain experience in human beings. Belief without experience
is useless to us. Therefore, we must look at the experience that
ideology and belief attempt to create in human beings.
As we have mentioned several times, we all want the experience
of love in our lives. Religions all over the world try to fulfill
this experience that is generally lacking in our lives. Love is the
experience that ideology and belief attempt to create in human
beings. Therefore, ideology and belief are servants to love. For
without love, their purpose becomes void of meaning. Therefore,
the ideology that you believe is only as good as the amount of love
that this ideology allows you to experience. When ideology looses
sight of its true objective it causes more harm than good.
Fundamentalism many times looses sight of ideology's true objective.
Fundamentalism places ideology as an end in itself. The experience
becomes secondary to the ideology. Just like when we establish a
certain rule in society, the rule we create is always created for a
particular reason. By the same token, when we loose sight of why
a rule was created, the rule can cause more harm than good.
Since our objectives as human beings lie in the experiential
realm, we always value our experience over our ideology. We
tell ourselves that if the experience is good, the ideology must
also be good. Therefore, when we experience love=free will
within a certain religion, we automatically believe in its ideology.
The majority of religious ideologies today proclaim that their
ideology is the highest ideology above all others. Since we
believe the experience we had as true, we also believe
the religious ideology to be true. But, how did the religious
ideology of "highest" or "only true" ideology come about?
The Amusement Park
There once existed an amusement park that was open to the
public. The main ride of the amusement park consisted of the
roller coaster. Many people tried to figure out what the truth
behind the roller coaster was. What was the objective of the
roller coaster? Why does the roller coaster exist? Many
theologians, scientists, philosophers, and many others of all
walks of life began to observe the roller coaster. Some looked at
the roller coaster from the ground floor in dead center of the
roller coaster. They would look at the roller coaster and wonder
why such a thing would ever be created. Others asked
themselves similar questions, but they observed the roller
coaster from a nearby hill because they could get a better view
of the whole of the roller coaster. And yet others also asked
themselves as to the nature of the roller coaster. These people
decided to observe the roller coaster from the front because they
could observe the beginning and the end of the journey of the
roller coaster. All of these people thought they had a pretty
good idea as to the true meaning of the roller coaster. Yet, all of
these people still doubted their own theories and had a hard time
believing what they thought up while looking at the roller
coaster from their particular point of reference. This all changed
when people from each particular group began to ride the roller
coaster. This experience confirmed the theories that they once
conceived of and removed any doubts that they might have had
about their theories being correct... for they knew that the
experience they had did not tell lies. Happily people returned to
their particular geographical location where they viewed the
roller coaster and realized that their view was the only view that
could lead them to such a beautiful experience. They thought
that no other view could ever provide such a profound perception of the truth of the roller coaster. People realized that their lives were experiencing great joy since they had finally realized the truth of the roller coaster. So, people felt that the best thing they could do was to share this joy with other people from diverse groups. A member of the group viewing the roller coaster from the hilltop invited a member of the group viewing the roller coaster from the ground floor over to the hilltop. This person expressed to the person from the ground floor how the view from the hill top will provide them with unlimited happiness and joy in their lives. But, the person from the ground floor immediately objected and told the person from the hilltop that they must come to the ground floor... for this is an even greater view and the joy is eternal. The 2 people argued over who's view was better. Both, a bit discouraged and annoyed at the ignorance and nearsightedness of the other member, went back to their respective groups and told the other members about their experience. Some of the members of the hilltop group reacted with aggression stating that the people of the ground floor group must be evil. They concluded that these people wanted to lead them away from the eternal joy that they had found. On the other hand, other members of the hilltop group asked how the roller coaster looked from the ground floor. These people began to doubt their own vision of the roller coaster. But, they immediately got on the roller coaster and experienced it in its full splendor. They concluded that their vision was real and that the ground floor group must be incorrect. Not only were they incorrect, but they were dangerous because they were trying to take them away from their way of life. Despite all of this apparent social pressure to stay away from the ground floor people, there were other members of the hilltop group that were so elated with their recent experiences riding the roller coaster that it didn't really matter to them what the vision of the ground floor people was. They just wanted to ride the roller coaster together with their newfound friends - the people of the ground floor.
When we realize that the experience of riding the roller coaster
is common to all human beings, which is manifested in the
choice to love, we will be able to place our ideologies aside and
love each other unconditionally. Ideologies help us to achieve
the experience of love-free will, but they hinder our ability to
remain there. Only the experience of choosing to love will
allow us to remain there. Religions or any other social group
have people who place great emphasis on ideology, while others
don't place too much importance on ideology, but place it on the
experience they receive. Why do we need ideology?
Suffering creates fear, and fear closes the door to new experience. Therefore, before we allow a change in experience in our lives, we want guarantees of the outcome. Even if we are already in a state of suffering, fear will not allow new experiences because fear tells us that we will suffer even more if we change. Therefore, fear needs promises. Ideology provides promises to our fears. Yet, fear also needs guarantees before it allows us to change. Without guarantees, fear will paralyze us forever. Ideology provides a guarantee for our fears. What guarantees does it provide? That it is the only true ideology and that it is the highest ideology of them all. Therefore, given this guarantee, fear lets go and allows us to experience something new. This new experience provides fear with proof that the ideology is true. Without experience we don't believe the ideology. But, even after our new experience, fear still remains... for we all remember our suffering, and therefore we hold on tightly to our ideology. On the other hand, some jump right into experience without any ideological promises or guarantees, since suffering is so intense that they are indifferent to more suffering. This allows for new experiences. The ecstasy of this experience can be so overwhelming that it can trigger fear of never experiencing it again. Therefore, they automatically jump into the ideology of the religion that provided them with that experience as an appeaser for their newly found fear.
Therefore, in both of these cases, the greater the fear, the greater we rely on ideology in order to arrive at experience. Yet, the greater the experiences, the greater the freedom it unleashes and, therefore less fear, and therefore less we rely on ideology to
arrive at experience.
From the outside, the experience of choosing to love can be very
scary. Love is somewhat of an insane state of being to live in.
It is irrational. Reason says that 1+1=2. Love says 1+1=Infinity. Reason says that 1=1. Love says that 1=Infinity. The roller coaster can be a very intimidating place in our imagination and in our mind. But once we are on it, we don't want to get off. Therefore, we must always trust that when we choose love, the roller coaster will always be there... hence faith. The more we ride the roller coaster, the easier it is to get on again and again and again. The more we doubt the ability of the roller coaster to give us the same experience as before, the more we rely on ideology to get us back to the roller coaster. Reason deceives us because our world is invisible to reason. If the world were not invisible to reason, we would have reached utopia by now... for reason is easy to comprehend, while love is not. Reason is of the mind. Love goes beyond the mind. Don't doubt your nature... have faith in love... choose to love the world today... for the roller coaster is never out of service and is always open... to everyone and everything... anywhere, anytime... the choice is always yours...
Attaining Love
Once we choose to love, it seems so hard to accomplish. As
mentioned, suffering is lacking in knowledge... for if we knew
everything we would never suffer... for everything is love. But, we
can't perceive this. Reason is blind to this and so is our mind. Therefore,
we must seek knowledge through understanding of others, ourselves,
and of the world.
The Tree
There once existed a tree. Everyone looks at the tree from a
different perspective. The economist, the philosopher, the
photographer, the blue-collar worker, the homeless man, the
prostitute, the priest, the businessman, the architect, the doctor,
we all see a different tree, but the tree remains the same. So,
what is a tree? If we all were to die, would the tree still exist?
Yes, of course. So, what is the tree? The tree is what the tree is.
So, we must become the tree to know the tree. Likewise, knowledge
of everything on earth is derived from our becoming
what we seek to comprehend. In becoming another we
comprehend the other. In comprehending another we
comprehend that the other is the same as ourselves. And
therefore, love becomes the natural feeling that is produced.
Likewise, knowledge of our selves can only be attained by
becoming ourselves. By deeply experiencing our own selves,
we will better comprehend our own essence... which is love...
which ultimately is only an experience of unity with everything
else... which ultimately means we don't exist. Only our will to
take us there exists. But, once our will becomes ourselves and
our self becomes the other we loose ourselves and find unity in
the whole. Only love exists. When we seek understanding in
every activity of our daily lives, we become the process and the
process becomes our destination and our destination becomes
peaceful, graceful, and never ending... for knowledge is never
ending... for love is eternal...for only love exists always
everywhere. Become the tree and it will set you free.
References
Eder, James F. 1999, A Generation Later: Household Strategies
and Economic Change in the Rural Philippines. Honolulu:
University of Hawaii Press.
Sanderson, Stephen K. 1995, Social Transformations - A
General Theory of Historical Development. Oxford and
Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
2002 Arab Human Development Report - Chapter 1 - Human
development: definition, concept and larger context.
www.undp.org