REFLECTIONS!

By

John Roberts(2007)

Musings on the essential nature of everything in this world: (January 2007)

A fundamental question is that of my own “existence”. This is not a new idea, by any means: as generations of men and women have pondered this question. In my own case, I look back upon 78 years of, largely uneventful activity, starting with my own thinking processes and the experiences of early life. Why do individual people “exist”, as we all believe that we do, indeed, exist as “human beings”? Why not some entirely different individual: leaving this personal consciousness in the limbo of non-existence? Am I, (and, accordingly, everyone else who has ever lived) merely the accidental result of a combination of incredibly complex circumstances? One thinks about the genetic history of an human being, which, in all cases, produces each individual as an unique character; quite different, in many respects, from his nearest and dearest. Only one variation, out of millions of combinations of circumstances, would mean that I am not and never can be “myself”. So, to that extent, each individual human being is an unique creation.

Obviously, one cannot be so very different from one’s fellows, given that we have most of our genes in common with the generality of mankind. It is in the thinking processes that we differ, if at all, from our family members, apart from obvious physical characteristics.

As an individual human-being, it does not matter, very much, what ideas I actually form, as to the meaning and purpose of my own existence. However, it does matter, collectively, just what we think of ourselves and our environment, as the net result of all human activity is the world, as we perceive it today: in the condition of everything that “exists” in our world. Quite obviously, humans are able-to and do, in fact, affect all other objects in our world, both animate and inanimate, by our personal conduct. If we don’t think about what we do, the results can be disastrous both for ourselves and for the living things that are subject to our control or are part of our environment.

When we think about the effect that human behaviour has had, in the last two Centuries, upon the flora and fauna of our world, we perceive that many species of animals and plants have disappeared from the face of the Earth, directly as a result of our thoughtless activity. In Europe, wild animals have been persecuted for generations, in the belief that they were a threat to our security. In the newly settled countries, both of the Western Hemisphere and in the Far East, the arrival of new waves of emigrant peoples has resulted directly in the loss of many unique species. Indigenous tribes in such places as North and South America and Australia, have been reduced by disease and maltreatment and, in many instances, annihilated, as a result of brutal and aggressive conduct on the part of “civilized” newcomers . In Australia and New Zealand, many species of mammals and bird-life have become extinct, within the last two-hundred or so years. Unfortunately, the arrival of the Mauri tribes, in New Zealand, a thousand years ago, or less, has resulted in the loss of some animal species, found nowhere else upon this Earth. The “Dodo” of Mauritius and the “Great Auk”, come to mind as two unique species that have disappeared, relatively recently, as a result of human thoughtlessness. The varied and numerous species of animals in Africa are under threat, as never before. Another fifty years will see the extinction of the Elephant, the Hippopotamus and the Gorilla, to mention only three familiar animals. In India, the Tiger will also soon have disappeared, for ever.

We are presently reminded, on an almost daily basis, that our world is warming-up and that there will be serious consequences relating to climate change and rising sea levels. Even now there is evidence of strange developments in both the North and South Poles, as ice melts at an alarming rate. As a result of this, many species will be threatened with loss of habitat and subsequent extinction. Our Politicians know about the problems, but are reluctant to act, as such action costs money, which has to be apportioned-out from revenue receipts. As a result, they adopt a “head in the sand” attitude and ignore the problems. In fact, we are all still too ignorant of what is best for us and do not want to know what we can do for humanity and the other life-forms on our planet, if it is inconvenient or costly for us to seek a remedy. We need to close down pollutant mines, not place a tax on the product. Coal Mines and Uranium Mines come to mind.

In this respect, we have changed little in the countless thousands of years in which mankind has been developing, which makes one wonder whether we will progress substantially along the evolutionary road, in the foreseeable future. After all, people in ancient Greece were capable of thinking about their environment and upon questions as to the purpose and meaning of existence. Yet, two and a half thousand years later, we have not advanced far upon the evolutionary process. Even the most sophisticated of modern folk are still, essentially, savages.

At first sight, it seems ludicrous for such infinitely minute creatures, as are we homo-sapiens, to attempt to define our environment and to seek for answers to philosophical questions. Yet we have been doing just this since we began to think for ourselves. In the process, we have only succeeded in confusing ourselves, more than ever. One has had to define one’s concepts as to a Deity and this, in itself, is an insoluble problem. When we talk about “God!” we are opening a can of worms, with, in essence, millions of varying ideas as to what is the meaning of this term. Each person’s training and experience, being different, means that everyone must, necessarily, have a separate concept of what he means by “God”. Indeed, these days, it must be true to state that lots of people have no concept whatever of a Deity or of a “God”, in the commonly accepted Western sense. When George Borrow was in Russia in the 1840’s endeavouring to translate the New Testament into Manchu (Chinese), he and his Russian associates could find no Chinese word for “God” and had to use a complex group of words to try to create the idea of “God”, in a way that made sense to the Chinese people. Christianity, whilst successful to some extent in the Far East, will never make much progress unless it is able to convince the people that it has something superior to the traditional doctrines.

Our Christian forebears (and many Christians today) have no difficulty in conceiving their “God” in very much the same form as the Jews. “He” is an extremely comprehensible individual, possessing all our own attributes, but having a much more superior status. He is the “Boss” of the Universe and we had better obey his Statutes. Such a view is convenient, as it, at least, gives us a starting point from which to grasp the idea of Deity. The Jewish concept of “The Lord”, which is a rather abstract idea, is also a very useful way of approaching “God”. Christians refer to Jesus of Nazareth as “The Lord” or “The Lord Jesus”, but this is a mistake and has the intended effect of deifying Jesus of Nazareth. “Bless the Lord, O my Soul and all that is within me, Bless His Holy Name!” (Psalm 103). This passage impresses me with a sense of the elevation of the mind of the Psalmist, to that Source from which all things are derived.

The extent to which the Catholic Church confuses the identities of “God the Father” and “God the Son”, is demonstrated when we consider some of the mildly blasphemous terms used in the Morality Plays of the “Middle Ages”: “By Goddes’ Bones!” or “By Goddes’ Corpus!” can only be a reference to “God the Son”, in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. It was disagreement as to the nature of the relationship between the “Father and the Son”, that led to the Arian Controversy and the split between the Western and Eastern Churches. In fact, the Pagan nature of the Doctrine of the Trinity has, perhaps, been the weakest feature of Catholic Christianity, which was too enthusiastic in deifying the person of Jesus. Of course, Paganism was quick to include “Jesus” as one of its numerous deities. It would be natural for 5th-Century Christians to consider him as a “God”. One might be tempted to ask: “If God the Father came down to Earth, in the person of Jesus, whom did he leave “In Charge” in the Heavenly Spheres?”

All attempts to “define” the creative intelligence behind our Universe, must be limited by our incapacity to comprehend something that is utterly beyond our mental faculties. We have to take it upon trust, or reject it entirely.

My own idea of Deity, which I have given in other writings of mine, is that “God” is a source of “Divine Love and Compassion”, with whom it is possible for each individual human being to enjoy a personal relationship. This is a pretty “tall order” and could only be explained by me as a purely subjective concept, arising from my own personal experiences. Notwithstanding the fact of its subjectivity, I am convinced that it is a valid definition and one worthy of consideration: particularly when it is also considered that the other alternatives are “Atheism” or “Agnosticism”, which do nothing to assure the individual that there is such a thing as “Divine Guidance” or some permanent substance to human individuality. Historically, there has always been a vigorous debate upon questions involving the concepts of “Free Will” and “Determinism”. My own view is that Free Will is absolute but that there is still an avenue of guidance available via the medium of “prayer” and “inspiration”. Such a view presupposes the existence of a “God”, very much in the traditional sense, but it also suggests that each person is responsible, to a great extent, for his or her own personal evolution.

Karl Marx is reported to have stated that “Religion is the opiate of the Masses!” Whilst this may be true, one would, necessarily, have to define what is meant by “Religion”. He, undoubtedly, meant that merely formal religion, as witnessed by him in the Churches (or Synagogues) of his own time. The “Masses” were, generally, illiterate and unable to learn, otherwise, than as the Priests taught them. If people were taught nonsense, then their senses were, indeed, being dulled by falsehood.

In the early 21st Century, it is no longer “Religion” but popular “Sport” that is the stupefying influence, to dull the minds of the ordinary people of the world. In one sense, it is sad that the Churches’ power to influence Society is on the wane, as there was a certain degree of merit revealed in a concern for the spiritual state of the people, as demonstrated by the work of outstanding religious reformers in the past.

It becomes increasingly apparent to me, as a layman, that the Church organizations of the Western World are increasingly becoming vast, tax-free businesses, having an enormous annual turnover. They are, consequently, becoming more and more materialistic, in pre-occupation with the business side of their enterprises. Here in Australia, the “Uniting Church” (so-called) from the merger of two separate groups, the Methodist and the Presbyterian Churches, (some years ago), presents as very active in the business field, combining “welfare work”, “second-hand clothing collection” and “unemployment services”, as part of its “Ministry” in the Community. It also holds a deal of valuable Real Estate, including those evident “Temples to Mammon: modern “Supermarkets” and “Shopping Towns”, in which all the paraphernalia of the Business World, is attractively displayed. Most other Church organizations conduct similar enterprises, resulting in an annual tax-free turnover of millions of Dollars. (Billions: World-wide). It seems to me that, whilst charitable work for Society is acceptable, when the spiritual life of a religious body becomes subverted to the making of money, (as is the case, perhaps, with most religious institutions), then genuine spirituality disappears. There can be no doubt that, throughout the Western World, Christian religious bodies are, increasingly, losing their grip on Society, resulting in a moral decline that has become an avalanche of degeneracy, right across the Social spectrum, within the last fifty years. It is evident that Christianity is in Crisis, as was the Polytheist system of Ancient Rome, when Christian Jews brought the New Religion to the Old World.

How is this regression affecting our world at the present time?

Millions of people, world wide, are without moral guidance. The advantage of Religion, whatever the doctrines that are taught, is that people learn some basic standards, by which to moderate their lives. One hundred years ago, it was true, that most people, in the West, went to Church on a Sunday and their children received instruction in the Virtues and Vices. The consequences of “Sin” were hammered into those children who attended both Protestant and Catholic Churches. Children learned to say their prayers. Muslims also are taught to obey the rules, breach of which can result in very serious punishment, both here and in the hereafter. It is certainly true to say that, at the present time, Muslims are more deeply involved with their “religious” ideas than are the great majority of “Westerners”, many of whom have no such thoughts.

In the case of Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, and similar disciplines, there is not the same idea of a personal “God”; who takes an interest in people. They are, essentially, systems of Moral Philosophy. However, questions of Morality and Right and Wrong are dealt with. In addition, Chinese traditional beliefs, in regard to what is called in the West, “Ancestor Worship”, involve questions of right and wrong and the consequences of improper conduct. Very importantly, from my own viewpoint, they point to an ineradicable belief in the survival of the Spirit of Man, after the physical death. As I understand Chinese Buddhism, in that Country, “prayer” to “Buddha”, who is a substitute for a Deity, is encouraged and practiced. I do not doubt that such a mental exercise is of value in assisting ordinary people to pursue life, in the awareness that there is guidance and consolation available to them, from a Spiritual source. There is probably a contradiction, here, between the formal Doctrine of immediate Re-incarnation after Death and the belief in the continuity of existence in an “Afterlife”, in which there can be some form of communion between the living and the dead.

Westerners, who have often scoffed at the idea of the thousands of “Gods” in the Hindu Pantheon, find it difficult to believe that there is any “Merit” in such a system. (Prayers are probably still repeated in Christian Churches for the conversion of the “Heathen”. This is, however, an arrogant and not, perhaps, a valid concept.) In a highly complex Society like India, with a myriad Castes and Trades, the separation of “Aspects of Deity” into forms comprehensible to simple, unlettered peasants, might have certain advantages. In fact, the situation in India differs very little, in practice, from that of the system of “Worship of the Saints”, in Catholic Christianity. In the latter case, the Saints take upon themselves the role of “Mediators” between God and Man. They act as “Patrons” to certain sections of Society, which enables people to feel that there is someone who is especially interested in their particular problems. The fact that such a concept is equally as absurd as Hindu’s worshipping an Elephant or a Monkey God, is immaterial. What is important in each case, is that the Central Deity remains “God the Father”, or “Brahma”, as the case may be. In fact, as a Spiritualist, I also accept the principle of mediation or Ministry of Guardian Spirits, who act as unseen counselors to people in this world. It is our personal concept or ideas that vary from individual to individual. We don’t actually “worship” our “Guides” or our “Ancestors”, nor do I imagine that to be the case with Chinese, who venerate the memory of their own Ancestors. The fact that they believe them to continue to live in another, Spiritual, environment is the important factor.

In thinking about “Religion” in general, it is important to recognize that the search for a meaning to life is part of the progressive evolution of the Race. I don’t believe that it is so very significant that a person be a member of one particular religion or another, whether it be Christian, Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist: to mention the major Religious denominations in our world. What is important is the extent to which religious belief contributes to that evolution. A Doctrine that promotes the well-being and happiness of people or encourages co-operation with folk of other “Faiths”, seems bound to assist humanity to progress. The reverse is also true: a belief that is perverse or twists basic spiritual principles for political or mercenary motives, could severely retard our evolution. This, sadly, is the history of the Christian Church, almost since its inception. It remains to be seen whether this pattern continues into the future or whether the Church, (and particularly, the Catholic Church), continues to develop the reforms that were initiated during the Papacy of John XX111.

My own personal belief is that it is not necessary to be particularly “Religious”, or indeed, to profess any religious convictions, at all. The leading of a good life: the avoidance of unnecessary evil and of co-operation with one’s fellows, will be sufficient to promote one’s personal well-being. That is the situation of an increasing number of persons in our world: even within those Countries that were once bastions of Orthodox Christianity. Millions of boys and girls now have no awareness of the existence of a Deity, of any nature whatsoever. I do not believe that this augers well for our Society, racked, as it already is, by greed and materialism. I do think that some form of religious belief is important for all people, as it assists in delineating an awareness of positive and negative values: that one has a “duty” to serve one’s fellows, is an important principle, that is rapidly giving way to an idea that one is entitled to get as much as possible out of life, regardless of the harm that may be caused to others.

When I was a lad, one rarely came into contact with a person of another religious denomination, as the various social groups, as a rule, did not mix with outsiders. Nowadays, one daily sees people of a number of differing religious bodies, many of whom are, evidently, sincere in the practice of their religious observations. Thus, if there is a vacuum as regards one person’s inner life, it may well be that they would be attracted by, what would at one time be regarded as an “alien” religious faith. This is probably the cause of a recent increase in the number of converts to Islam. It is common knowledge that the Muslim Religion is increasing in numbers, daily, not merely by reason of an increased birthrate. This should send out alarm bells within the “Christian Communities”.

An aggressive Islam has, for Centuries, been seen as a threat to the continuance of Christianity and this is, for Western peoples, an unfortunate development. It is, of course, partly the result of the mass migration of Middle-and Far-Eastern Muslims into European Countries and also into Australia. So far as the latter Country is concerned, what originated in a plan to subvert the Northern European nature of Australian cultural life, has been extraordinary successful. It has resulted in the recent belated and futile change of Policy by the Conservative Government of Australia, which would like to ditch the idea of “Multi-Culturalism” and emphasize the necessity of “Assimilation” into traditional Australian Society. Such a step would be certain to increase inter-racial tensions here and, undoubtedly, cause public disorder and violence.

The future does not appear to be too rosy, at the present time. Our leaders are, like so many others, nominally “Christian” and, from time to time are seen to be performing their ritual observances. However, their conduct belies such implicit expressions of religious belief, as they are presently in the process of increasing the size of the Armed Forces of Australia and our Domestic Spy Network, to an enormous degree and quite in excess of this Country’s reasonable needs. The course of “militarization” of this Nation has been taking place over a number of years but has accelerated with the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan: in line with the nefarious policies of the United States. I have previously dwelt at greater length, on this point, in my two recent essays, “Fascism” and “Australia – 50years-on.” I introduce this topic now, as it has a very great bearing on questions of “Morality” in our day and Age.

To witness the moral destitution of our World in the year 2007 is to be fearful as to the consequences to our Children and Grandchildren. There can be no “going back”: we cannot alter the crimes committed against humanity by our leaders, with our tacit participation, in remaining silent in the face of the great wickedness being perpetrated in our name. As Hilary Clinton, aspiring future President of the USA has recently announced, “America has not learnt the lessons of the Vietnam War!” She and I may not agree on the precise “lessons” to be learnt, but I would aver that one lesson is that of “humanity and compassion” towards much weaker and poorer folk.

God preserve us all from our “Peaceful and Freedom-Loving” Politicians!

Finis

John Roberts

Sydney, Australia

30th January 2007

mailto:robertsjno@gmail.com