This is an extract from The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. It is from the chapter called "The powers of the mind" (pg 19)
***
Man is growing in knowledge, in power, in happiness. Continously, we are growing as a race. We see that is true, perfectly true. Is it true of individuals? To a certain extent, yes. But yet again comes the question: Where do you fix the limit? I can see only at a distance of so many feet. But I have seen a man close his eyes and see what is happening in another room. If you say you do not believe it, perhaps in three weeks that man can make you do the same. It can be taught to anybody. Some persons, in five minutes even, can be made to read what is happening in another man's mind. These facts can be demonstrated.
Now, if these things are true, where can we put a limit? If a man can read what is happening in another's mind in the corner of this room, why not in the next room? Why not anywhere? We cannot say, why not. We dare not say that it is not possible. We can only say, we do not know how it happens. Material scientists have no right to say that things like this are not possible; they can only say, "We do not know." Science has to collect facts, generalise upon them, deduce principles, and state the truth - that is all. But if we begin by denying the facts, how can a science be?
There is not end to the power a man can obtain. This is the peculiarity of the Indian mind, that when anything interests it, it gets absorbed in it and other things are neglected. You know how many sciences had their origin in India. Mathematics began there. You are even today counting 1,2,3 etc to zero, after Sanskrit figures, and you all know that algebra also originated in India, and that gravitation was known to the Indians thousands of years before Newton was born.
You see the pecularity. At a certain period of Indian history, this one subject of man and his mind absorbed all their interest. And it was so enticing, because it seemed the easiest way to achieve their ends. Now, the Indian mind became so thoroughly persyaded that the mind could do anything and everything according to law, that its powers became the great object of study. Charms, magic and other powers, all that were nothing extraordinary, but a regularly taught science, just as the physical sciences they had taught before that. Such a conviction in these things came upon the race that physical sciences nearly died out. It was the one thing that came before them. Different sects of Yogis began to make all sorts of experiments. Some made experiments with light, trying to find out how lights of different colours produced changes in the body. They wore a certain coloured cloth, lived under a certain colour, and ate certain coloured foods. All sorts of experiments were made[sic] in this way. Others made experiments in sound by stopping and unstopping their ears. And still others experimented in the sense of smell, and so on...
"
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
Monday, May 01, 2006
Veterans...
I found this brief write-up hiding in a remote corner of my Hard Drive. I'd written it about three years ago, a long long time for views to change, but still like it. It is a bit showy, and slightly pretentious, but it wasn't meant for public reading, so you'll forgive the slight pompous writing style...
***
No man, can know the future. It is said by many, that if one could achieve this foresight, life wouldn't be as interesting as it remains today, inspite of all the miracles of modern science, and all the efforts to minimize, if not remove completely, uncertainity from our lives. Life would start to be dull and predictable, they say. They may be, and probably are, right on both counts.
No man, can know the future. No man can predict it. Humans, as a race are quite irrational. What we do not know, we fear. And so, we fear the future. Not only because we do not know anything about what is going to happen, but also because there is no way to counter this. No way to develop an "early-warning system" of sorts, for the future. And that terrifies us.
Every single one of us. Yes, you too. If you're honest with yourself, you'll remember that one time you couldn't think straight, because you were overcome by that chilling, absolute terror, of what would happen to you in the future. This comes to every sane human being. For most, it comes somewhere around the end of their teens, yet the proverbial "middle-age crisis" is but another manifestation of this fear.
And so, I say, what? So what? So what if I fear the future? Simple fear doesn't mean much. I'm afraid of a lot of things, like most people - afraid of failure, afraid of ineptness, of incompetence, of inability, of.... the list goes on.
Yet what I am perhaps most afraid of, is not being able to face up to my fears.
Do not misunderstand me. I'm not Superman; when i feel afraid, it does impair my ability to think clearly. Very few people can claim otherwise. And I salute that very few. For they are the true warriors against fear. Veterans, everyone of them, and undoubtedly, with scars to prove that status.
Yet, I remain afraid, inspite of these pristine examples of the power of the human conscious to conquer the subconscious.
Yes, afraid, but what sets my efforts in the same category as those veterans, is that inspite of my being afraid, and my mind being clouded by fear, I TRY.
I try to clear that fog. I try to break free. I may not always succeed, but that is what sets me apart. I may not always think of the best way to combat my fears and find a solution to what causes those fears, but I TRY.
That is how I learn.
I learn to fight, to not cower. I may not learn the best way to fight, the best moves, the best kicks and punches, but I learn that I CAN fight. And more importantly, I teach my subconscious that. So the next time, it will not burden my mind with unreasoning fear, and allow me to combat the situtation better.
My next response to fear will improve, and the next even further, and the next, and the next...
And so, I will be a veteran. All of my fellows, who do not face their fears, or those who try to cover them, will not. They will remain the greenhorns, that will be replenished after each battle. For the greenies are the ones that are left one the battlefield. The veterans survive.
***
***
No man, can know the future. It is said by many, that if one could achieve this foresight, life wouldn't be as interesting as it remains today, inspite of all the miracles of modern science, and all the efforts to minimize, if not remove completely, uncertainity from our lives. Life would start to be dull and predictable, they say. They may be, and probably are, right on both counts.
No man, can know the future. No man can predict it. Humans, as a race are quite irrational. What we do not know, we fear. And so, we fear the future. Not only because we do not know anything about what is going to happen, but also because there is no way to counter this. No way to develop an "early-warning system" of sorts, for the future. And that terrifies us.
Every single one of us. Yes, you too. If you're honest with yourself, you'll remember that one time you couldn't think straight, because you were overcome by that chilling, absolute terror, of what would happen to you in the future. This comes to every sane human being. For most, it comes somewhere around the end of their teens, yet the proverbial "middle-age crisis" is but another manifestation of this fear.
And so, I say, what? So what? So what if I fear the future? Simple fear doesn't mean much. I'm afraid of a lot of things, like most people - afraid of failure, afraid of ineptness, of incompetence, of inability, of.... the list goes on.
Yet what I am perhaps most afraid of, is not being able to face up to my fears.
Do not misunderstand me. I'm not Superman; when i feel afraid, it does impair my ability to think clearly. Very few people can claim otherwise. And I salute that very few. For they are the true warriors against fear. Veterans, everyone of them, and undoubtedly, with scars to prove that status.
Yet, I remain afraid, inspite of these pristine examples of the power of the human conscious to conquer the subconscious.
Yes, afraid, but what sets my efforts in the same category as those veterans, is that inspite of my being afraid, and my mind being clouded by fear, I TRY.
I try to clear that fog. I try to break free. I may not always succeed, but that is what sets me apart. I may not always think of the best way to combat my fears and find a solution to what causes those fears, but I TRY.
That is how I learn.
I learn to fight, to not cower. I may not learn the best way to fight, the best moves, the best kicks and punches, but I learn that I CAN fight. And more importantly, I teach my subconscious that. So the next time, it will not burden my mind with unreasoning fear, and allow me to combat the situtation better.
My next response to fear will improve, and the next even further, and the next, and the next...
And so, I will be a veteran. All of my fellows, who do not face their fears, or those who try to cover them, will not. They will remain the greenhorns, that will be replenished after each battle. For the greenies are the ones that are left one the battlefield. The veterans survive.
***
Ethos and Ethical Laws
I came across this very nice dialogue between two enemies in a sci-fi novel, called Deathworld, by Harry Harrison. Thought I'd post it here...
***
Jason : "...It is impossible to talk to you, much less enjoy any comprehensible exchange of ideas. We aren't even speaking the same language. Forgetting for the moment who is right and who is wrong,, we should go back to basics and at least agree on the meaning of the terms that we are using. To begin with - can you define the define the difference between ethics and ethos?"
Mikah: " Of course, Ethics is the discipline dealing with what is good or bad, or wight or wrong - or with moral duty or obligation. Ethos means the guiding beliefs, standards, or ideals, that characterize a group or community."
Jason: "Very good...Ethos is inextricably linked with a single society and cannot be separated from it, or it loses all meaning. Do you agree?"
Mikah: "Well..."
Jason: " Oh come on - you have to agree on the terms of your own definition. The ethos of a group is just a catch-all term for the ways in which the members of a group interact with each other. Right?"
Mikah: " yes..."
Jason: "Now that we agree about that, we can push on one step further. Ethics, again by your own deginition must deal with any number of societies or groups. If there are any absolute laws of ethics, they must be so inclusive that they can be applied to any society. A law of ethics must be as universal of application, as is the law of gravity."
Mikah: " I don't follow you..."
Jason: " I didn't think you would when I got to this point. You people who prattle about your Universal Laws of Truth never really consider the meaning of the term. My knowledge of the history of science is a little vague, but I'm willing to bet that the first Law of Gravity that was ever dreamed up stated that things fell at such and such speed, and accelerated at such and such a rate. That's not a law, but an observation that isn't even complete until you add 'on this planet'. On a planet with a different mass there will be a different observation.... If you are going to have any real ethical laws they have to have the unversality of
m. M
F = ------
2
d
They will have to work on Cassylia or Pyrrus, or on any other planet or in any society you can find. Which brings us back to you. What you so grandly call - with capital letters, and a flourish of trumpets - 'Laws of Ethics' aren't laws at all, but are simply little chunks of tribal ethos, aboriginal observations made by a gang of desert sheepherders to keep order in the house - or tent. These rules aren't capable of any universal application; even you must see that...
...Just think of the different planets you have been on, and the number of weird and wonderful ways people have of reacting to each other - then try and visualise ten rules of conduct that would be applicable in all these societies. An impossible task. Yet I'll bet you have ten rules you want me to obey, and if one of them is wasted on an injunction against praying to carved idols, I can imagine just how universal the other nine are. You aren't being ethical if you try to apply them wherever you go - you're just finding a particularly fancy way to commit suicide...!"
***
What do you think? Thought-provoking huh?
***
Jason : "...It is impossible to talk to you, much less enjoy any comprehensible exchange of ideas. We aren't even speaking the same language. Forgetting for the moment who is right and who is wrong,, we should go back to basics and at least agree on the meaning of the terms that we are using. To begin with - can you define the define the difference between ethics and ethos?"
Mikah: " Of course, Ethics is the discipline dealing with what is good or bad, or wight or wrong - or with moral duty or obligation. Ethos means the guiding beliefs, standards, or ideals, that characterize a group or community."
Jason: "Very good...Ethos is inextricably linked with a single society and cannot be separated from it, or it loses all meaning. Do you agree?"
Mikah: "Well..."
Jason: " Oh come on - you have to agree on the terms of your own definition. The ethos of a group is just a catch-all term for the ways in which the members of a group interact with each other. Right?"
Mikah: " yes..."
Jason: "Now that we agree about that, we can push on one step further. Ethics, again by your own deginition must deal with any number of societies or groups. If there are any absolute laws of ethics, they must be so inclusive that they can be applied to any society. A law of ethics must be as universal of application, as is the law of gravity."
Mikah: " I don't follow you..."
Jason: " I didn't think you would when I got to this point. You people who prattle about your Universal Laws of Truth never really consider the meaning of the term. My knowledge of the history of science is a little vague, but I'm willing to bet that the first Law of Gravity that was ever dreamed up stated that things fell at such and such speed, and accelerated at such and such a rate. That's not a law, but an observation that isn't even complete until you add 'on this planet'. On a planet with a different mass there will be a different observation.... If you are going to have any real ethical laws they have to have the unversality of
m. M
F = ------
2
d
They will have to work on Cassylia or Pyrrus, or on any other planet or in any society you can find. Which brings us back to you. What you so grandly call - with capital letters, and a flourish of trumpets - 'Laws of Ethics' aren't laws at all, but are simply little chunks of tribal ethos, aboriginal observations made by a gang of desert sheepherders to keep order in the house - or tent. These rules aren't capable of any universal application; even you must see that...
...Just think of the different planets you have been on, and the number of weird and wonderful ways people have of reacting to each other - then try and visualise ten rules of conduct that would be applicable in all these societies. An impossible task. Yet I'll bet you have ten rules you want me to obey, and if one of them is wasted on an injunction against praying to carved idols, I can imagine just how universal the other nine are. You aren't being ethical if you try to apply them wherever you go - you're just finding a particularly fancy way to commit suicide...!"
***
What do you think? Thought-provoking huh?
Morals, Identity, Spirituality, And Religion.
Morals, Identity and Spirituality.
In life, we are often confronted with moral and ethical dilemmas. We make choices, thus deciding what path we take onward on the remaining journey in front of us.
Morals.
By moral dilemma I mean a predicament testing our conscience. We have to decide what we hold as right, what as wrong. Our values are tested, and in the process, reinforced or changed. But always strengthened. Facing problems makes a better man, though it always does not seem so at the time.
The question of morality is of paramount importance, because one’s morals define one’s identity and one’s perspective on life. Often we are born into a set of values, given to us by our parents, our peers, and our community. We accept this value-system, taking it as Holy Writ; immutable. If we do not strive to continuously reevaluate these morals, we may not become fundamentalist in our beliefs, but they remain static.
You cannot appreciate the qualities of a prism looking at the world through a blue-colored glass. Roses and thorns will seem to be of the same color. A rainbow will simply be a band of lines shading from black to blue and back to black.
And so it is that one cannot appreciate fully the commonest group of morals found in almost every subset, and believed in by the largest part of humanity by refusing to experiment and change one’s perspective.
Missionaries and Tribals.
To the Christian missionary, he is doing a great service converting the “pagan” heathen by making him hear the Word of the Lord. To the keepers of that “pagan” religion, the philosophers carrying on the ancient traditions evolved over time by their own thinkers, the missionary is doing a great disservice by pulling wool over the convert’s eyes, deluding him away from the righteous path of life.
Both the missionary and the native religious leaders are good according to their own morals, yet subversive, if not entirely evil according to the other’s morals.
Yet when you are reading this paragraph, you have the unique vantage of having this situation sketched out to you in an impartial manner. The situation could have been presented thus:
“These poor people. They know not the Word of the Lord. They are ignorant. And their ignorance is the root of their sin. Forgive them, my Lord. Give me strength to help me show them your Path. In nomine patrius…” – thoughts of the missionary.
“That outsider has been trying to lure our people into renouncing the religion of our forefathers, claiming that the wisdom our people have put together over centuries is worthless, and that this is the road to evil.”
“Did we invite him? We are not evil. By saying so he insults our very goodness. He is the one sowing seeds of discord in our community. We were getting along just fine before he came about with his funny ideas.”
“This is not good. Anything that disturbs the peaceful existence of our people as ordained by the spirits of our ancestors who watch over us is not good. That missionary is not good.”
“We shall have to perform a ritual to ask for guidance and strength for saving our people from this apostasy…”
- Discussion in tribal leaders’ camp.
Taken individually, each perspective is wholly understandable, if a bit simplified for the sake of argument.
But go back and read the impartial discussion of the situation. This can be attained only after reading both these subjective views, understanding them, and collating them to form a cohesive view of what the situation would be like, if one were to see it without any emotional attachments, dispassionately, objectively.
Objectivity and Subjectivity.
Objectivity rises only through rising above subjectivity. But one has to experience subjectivity first.
One has to see from all the differently biased viewpoints to ascertain that there are limits to subjectivity, as a point has to move to all the different quadrants within a circle to find out that there is a definite circumference beyond which the circle ends.
Thus only will the point start looking out of the plane, having experienced and exhausted the possibilities in that enclosed space.
Conscience and Identity.
Our experiences often define our conscience. By experiences one need not mean personal experiences, but even the community’s attitude towards issues.
A young boy born into a household where the head of the family was a prominent member of the Ku Klux Klan would not find the theory of white supremacy absurd.
He would see no harm in lynching African-Americans simply for the color of their skin.
For his father, the person who would define his morals for the greater part of his formative years, it would be the most natural thing in the world to pass on his beliefs to his son. His son would therefore associate with his father’s KKK friends, and be exposed to racism in a very different way than an African-American child, for example.
Is the KKK-initiate evil? Not according to his morals. He hasn’t reconsidered his rights and wrongs, simply accepting what was given to him. His fault lies in not thinking and trying to define his own viewpoint, not in being evil.
A tribal woman who teaches her daughter to obey her husband no matter how much he abuses her, no matter how much undeserving of respect the husband may be, is passing on a value-system to another individual who will be very reluctant to question this system and break out of it to find her own morals.
A teenager who tries smoking or other substances does so mostly under “peer pressure”. Peer pressure is not really pressure, nor merely pressure. It is imposition of a communal group of values onto an individual, in this case during a critical formative part of the individual’s conscience and psyche.
He knows it is wrong before he tries it. But afterwards he continues doing it, getting addicted, and his conscience often conveniently overlooks this drastic change in morals.
The tribal woman’s daughter, the puffing teenager, and the KKK scion all are guilty of having their identity defined by others. There are circumstances where one cannot go against the tide, no matter how much one tries, yet the forming of one’s conscience is firmly in one’s grasp.
Revaluating Morals.
We must understand how crucial morals are to a person’s life. They are the base of life. Not just of interactions with other people, but also of how one sees the world and one’s place in it.
And so we must understand how difficult it is to step out of the value-set we are given and look for another - searching, experimenting, thinking, rejecting, but always persevering till the inner mind is at rest.
Therefore, we must appreciate the ones who are able to do this - to reject the code of life imposed on them by heredity, and search for their own. They may find that their original value-system was what they were searching for. But the goal is not important; the search is; the breaking-out is.
Yet we must realize just how crucial this search is. It is difficult, this renouncement of everything we know, for one is left with a sense of loss, often grief, loneliness, and fear for being without an ethical support system.
One who renounces in such a way is initially afraid because he no longer knows what really is right, and if there is an absolute right. It is frightening to not know right and wrong when you have known for such a long time. It is frightening to not know.
And this search defines our identity.
Identity.
Identity is very important - ask anyone. If we do not know who we are, we do not know what we have to do, if we have to do anything at all. We are afraid of not having an identity. Sometimes this instinctive desire for identity manifests itself as the desire to belong to a community, a society, thus ensuring an identity for oneself by belong to a larger group. At other times a person wants to shun this social identity and search for one of his/her own. Both collectivism and individualism are simply different manifestation of the desire for identity.
What we are defines how we think. What we are is the sum of our experiences, and our experiences indicate the choices we will make in future situations, thus defining the direction our future identity will take. It is a cycle.
As our morals define our identity, so our identity defines how we perceive life and the world around us. When we try to understand the world around us, inevitably, in one form or the other, we come to spirituality.
Spirituality & Religion.
As our morals define our identity, so our identity defines our spirituality. Our sense of being defines how we perceive our place in this universe. Our notions of nature, of God, of good, of evil, of duty, of love, of laws, of the relevance of laws… thus, in a way our identity defines our identity itself.
But identity also defines spirituality. We try to understand the world and we are faced with questions measured in the dimensions of the infinite. We human beings, possessing finite biological information processing capabilities, try to understand all of creation. We try to understand infinity. And we fail.
We fail because we see our bodies as finite, which they are. But we do not see the soul within, which is not finite. The soul is a small part of infinity, infinite in itself. When we realize infinity cannot be explained with the brain, we turn to the mind.
And so we define how we see the concept of God. God is Allah to some, Ram to others, the Father to yet others… the list goes on.
To atheist scientists God is the infinite sum total of energy in the universe.
To Agnostics God is irrelevant, for he interferes not in man’s affairs, and being perfect, is unattainable to an inherently imperfect human species.
Yet all agree God is perfect, whether real or not. How we see that perfection, how we choose to define our ultimate pinnacle of achievement, forever unattainable in effort, yet always the only goal, is our interpretation of God.
Religion and Rituals vs. Spirituality.
Speaking frankly, very few religious people know why they are religious. Very few Hindus know why yagnas are conducted in the precise manner they follow or what significance the time of the day has on the desired effects of the ritual. Very few devotees know why the prayer they are singing is in the form it is, and being sung in the tone it is. There might be reasons behind every ritual, or it might have resulted from a long time of following tradition, obscuring the real purpose behind the ritual. Religion often overshadows spirituality.
Religion is not bad. It is in no way less than spirituality. In fact, it is built up upon spirituality, as a means to implement the faith system of a spiritual philosophy and relate it to a practice in real life, so ensuring that the idea remains fixedly in our minds, not allowing us to forget.
By being devoutly religious we have a chance to be sublimely spiritual, if we examine the reasons behind why our religion is the way it is – the customs, the rituals, the social practices etc.
The Cycle
Having defined how identity gives birth to spirituality, we must also see that spirituality in turn also defines our morals and our willingness to constantly re-examine them.
If we believe in our version of God strongly enough, unshakable in the faith that He guides us always onto the right path if our intentions are pure and efforts diligent, then only we will be willing to let go of our system of morals, having faith that we will not go astray; that we will always have someone watching over us while we search for the right path this time and every other time.
Only then will the mind even consider reconsidering itself.
Thus spirituality leads to the ability to re-look at our morals.
An important point to be made here is that this cycle is not automatic. At every transition there has to be will and faith in one’s innate goodness. Willingness is very important, the only and all empowering catalyst. Where there is a will, there is a way, true, but without a will, there is no way.
Thus morals, identity, spirituality and religion are so wonderfully interlinked. One has to read a lot, experiment with one’s conceptions more, and meditate upon oneself and the ultimate goodness of the soul even more to have any chance at all at succeeding.
In life, we are often confronted with moral and ethical dilemmas. We make choices, thus deciding what path we take onward on the remaining journey in front of us.
Morals.
By moral dilemma I mean a predicament testing our conscience. We have to decide what we hold as right, what as wrong. Our values are tested, and in the process, reinforced or changed. But always strengthened. Facing problems makes a better man, though it always does not seem so at the time.
The question of morality is of paramount importance, because one’s morals define one’s identity and one’s perspective on life. Often we are born into a set of values, given to us by our parents, our peers, and our community. We accept this value-system, taking it as Holy Writ; immutable. If we do not strive to continuously reevaluate these morals, we may not become fundamentalist in our beliefs, but they remain static.
You cannot appreciate the qualities of a prism looking at the world through a blue-colored glass. Roses and thorns will seem to be of the same color. A rainbow will simply be a band of lines shading from black to blue and back to black.
And so it is that one cannot appreciate fully the commonest group of morals found in almost every subset, and believed in by the largest part of humanity by refusing to experiment and change one’s perspective.
Missionaries and Tribals.
To the Christian missionary, he is doing a great service converting the “pagan” heathen by making him hear the Word of the Lord. To the keepers of that “pagan” religion, the philosophers carrying on the ancient traditions evolved over time by their own thinkers, the missionary is doing a great disservice by pulling wool over the convert’s eyes, deluding him away from the righteous path of life.
Both the missionary and the native religious leaders are good according to their own morals, yet subversive, if not entirely evil according to the other’s morals.
Yet when you are reading this paragraph, you have the unique vantage of having this situation sketched out to you in an impartial manner. The situation could have been presented thus:
“These poor people. They know not the Word of the Lord. They are ignorant. And their ignorance is the root of their sin. Forgive them, my Lord. Give me strength to help me show them your Path. In nomine patrius…” – thoughts of the missionary.
“That outsider has been trying to lure our people into renouncing the religion of our forefathers, claiming that the wisdom our people have put together over centuries is worthless, and that this is the road to evil.”
“Did we invite him? We are not evil. By saying so he insults our very goodness. He is the one sowing seeds of discord in our community. We were getting along just fine before he came about with his funny ideas.”
“This is not good. Anything that disturbs the peaceful existence of our people as ordained by the spirits of our ancestors who watch over us is not good. That missionary is not good.”
“We shall have to perform a ritual to ask for guidance and strength for saving our people from this apostasy…”
- Discussion in tribal leaders’ camp.
Taken individually, each perspective is wholly understandable, if a bit simplified for the sake of argument.
But go back and read the impartial discussion of the situation. This can be attained only after reading both these subjective views, understanding them, and collating them to form a cohesive view of what the situation would be like, if one were to see it without any emotional attachments, dispassionately, objectively.
Objectivity and Subjectivity.
Objectivity rises only through rising above subjectivity. But one has to experience subjectivity first.
One has to see from all the differently biased viewpoints to ascertain that there are limits to subjectivity, as a point has to move to all the different quadrants within a circle to find out that there is a definite circumference beyond which the circle ends.
Thus only will the point start looking out of the plane, having experienced and exhausted the possibilities in that enclosed space.
Conscience and Identity.
Our experiences often define our conscience. By experiences one need not mean personal experiences, but even the community’s attitude towards issues.
A young boy born into a household where the head of the family was a prominent member of the Ku Klux Klan would not find the theory of white supremacy absurd.
He would see no harm in lynching African-Americans simply for the color of their skin.
For his father, the person who would define his morals for the greater part of his formative years, it would be the most natural thing in the world to pass on his beliefs to his son. His son would therefore associate with his father’s KKK friends, and be exposed to racism in a very different way than an African-American child, for example.
Is the KKK-initiate evil? Not according to his morals. He hasn’t reconsidered his rights and wrongs, simply accepting what was given to him. His fault lies in not thinking and trying to define his own viewpoint, not in being evil.
A tribal woman who teaches her daughter to obey her husband no matter how much he abuses her, no matter how much undeserving of respect the husband may be, is passing on a value-system to another individual who will be very reluctant to question this system and break out of it to find her own morals.
A teenager who tries smoking or other substances does so mostly under “peer pressure”. Peer pressure is not really pressure, nor merely pressure. It is imposition of a communal group of values onto an individual, in this case during a critical formative part of the individual’s conscience and psyche.
He knows it is wrong before he tries it. But afterwards he continues doing it, getting addicted, and his conscience often conveniently overlooks this drastic change in morals.
The tribal woman’s daughter, the puffing teenager, and the KKK scion all are guilty of having their identity defined by others. There are circumstances where one cannot go against the tide, no matter how much one tries, yet the forming of one’s conscience is firmly in one’s grasp.
Revaluating Morals.
We must understand how crucial morals are to a person’s life. They are the base of life. Not just of interactions with other people, but also of how one sees the world and one’s place in it.
And so we must understand how difficult it is to step out of the value-set we are given and look for another - searching, experimenting, thinking, rejecting, but always persevering till the inner mind is at rest.
Therefore, we must appreciate the ones who are able to do this - to reject the code of life imposed on them by heredity, and search for their own. They may find that their original value-system was what they were searching for. But the goal is not important; the search is; the breaking-out is.
Yet we must realize just how crucial this search is. It is difficult, this renouncement of everything we know, for one is left with a sense of loss, often grief, loneliness, and fear for being without an ethical support system.
One who renounces in such a way is initially afraid because he no longer knows what really is right, and if there is an absolute right. It is frightening to not know right and wrong when you have known for such a long time. It is frightening to not know.
And this search defines our identity.
Identity.
Identity is very important - ask anyone. If we do not know who we are, we do not know what we have to do, if we have to do anything at all. We are afraid of not having an identity. Sometimes this instinctive desire for identity manifests itself as the desire to belong to a community, a society, thus ensuring an identity for oneself by belong to a larger group. At other times a person wants to shun this social identity and search for one of his/her own. Both collectivism and individualism are simply different manifestation of the desire for identity.
What we are defines how we think. What we are is the sum of our experiences, and our experiences indicate the choices we will make in future situations, thus defining the direction our future identity will take. It is a cycle.
As our morals define our identity, so our identity defines how we perceive life and the world around us. When we try to understand the world around us, inevitably, in one form or the other, we come to spirituality.
Spirituality & Religion.
As our morals define our identity, so our identity defines our spirituality. Our sense of being defines how we perceive our place in this universe. Our notions of nature, of God, of good, of evil, of duty, of love, of laws, of the relevance of laws… thus, in a way our identity defines our identity itself.
But identity also defines spirituality. We try to understand the world and we are faced with questions measured in the dimensions of the infinite. We human beings, possessing finite biological information processing capabilities, try to understand all of creation. We try to understand infinity. And we fail.
We fail because we see our bodies as finite, which they are. But we do not see the soul within, which is not finite. The soul is a small part of infinity, infinite in itself. When we realize infinity cannot be explained with the brain, we turn to the mind.
And so we define how we see the concept of God. God is Allah to some, Ram to others, the Father to yet others… the list goes on.
To atheist scientists God is the infinite sum total of energy in the universe.
To Agnostics God is irrelevant, for he interferes not in man’s affairs, and being perfect, is unattainable to an inherently imperfect human species.
Yet all agree God is perfect, whether real or not. How we see that perfection, how we choose to define our ultimate pinnacle of achievement, forever unattainable in effort, yet always the only goal, is our interpretation of God.
Religion and Rituals vs. Spirituality.
Speaking frankly, very few religious people know why they are religious. Very few Hindus know why yagnas are conducted in the precise manner they follow or what significance the time of the day has on the desired effects of the ritual. Very few devotees know why the prayer they are singing is in the form it is, and being sung in the tone it is. There might be reasons behind every ritual, or it might have resulted from a long time of following tradition, obscuring the real purpose behind the ritual. Religion often overshadows spirituality.
Religion is not bad. It is in no way less than spirituality. In fact, it is built up upon spirituality, as a means to implement the faith system of a spiritual philosophy and relate it to a practice in real life, so ensuring that the idea remains fixedly in our minds, not allowing us to forget.
By being devoutly religious we have a chance to be sublimely spiritual, if we examine the reasons behind why our religion is the way it is – the customs, the rituals, the social practices etc.
The Cycle
Having defined how identity gives birth to spirituality, we must also see that spirituality in turn also defines our morals and our willingness to constantly re-examine them.
If we believe in our version of God strongly enough, unshakable in the faith that He guides us always onto the right path if our intentions are pure and efforts diligent, then only we will be willing to let go of our system of morals, having faith that we will not go astray; that we will always have someone watching over us while we search for the right path this time and every other time.
Only then will the mind even consider reconsidering itself.
Thus spirituality leads to the ability to re-look at our morals.
An important point to be made here is that this cycle is not automatic. At every transition there has to be will and faith in one’s innate goodness. Willingness is very important, the only and all empowering catalyst. Where there is a will, there is a way, true, but without a will, there is no way.
Thus morals, identity, spirituality and religion are so wonderfully interlinked. One has to read a lot, experiment with one’s conceptions more, and meditate upon oneself and the ultimate goodness of the soul even more to have any chance at all at succeeding.
Introducing the one, the only....
This blog is starting out in response to a suggestion from a respected colleague, although now I wonder why I never did anything like this before.
I intend to keep this blog to mostly posts about Life, the Universe, and Everything. More specifically, metaphysics, physics, comparative religion, etc...
I'll appreciate it if people who read this one do not give nonsensical comments, as I intend for the comment space to be a place for serious feedback.
Thanks, that's all.
Vipul
I intend to keep this blog to mostly posts about Life, the Universe, and Everything. More specifically, metaphysics, physics, comparative religion, etc...
I'll appreciate it if people who read this one do not give nonsensical comments, as I intend for the comment space to be a place for serious feedback.
Thanks, that's all.
Vipul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
