Doing more reading last night from the “Ways of Religion” I borrowed from James. Some excellent excerpts in there from every religion. It should be required reading for everyone to expose them to different belief systems, see how much they all have in common, and I think it is an excellent book to get one to think about one’s own beliefs.
For a while I’ve tried to reconcile my Zen/Buddhist beliefs with wanting to help the world. The Buddhist who seeks enlightenment is aware of the self, and the intricate relationship of the self with the whole of the world. By reaching enlightenment he reaches a state, not where he does not care about the world, but where he has no need to take actions to change the world from selfish desires.
For me this conflicts with basic humanitarian beliefs to help others. I was glad to find Mahayana Buddhism, which believes that while the true pursuit of Buddhism is personal enlightenment, it is selfish to wish this for the self without wanting to help others attain it as well. This resonates much better with me.
It is my own personal obligation to pursue enlightenment as thoroughly as I can, but also to attend to others’ needs, help others, and be an example for others as well. Mahayana Buddhism acknowledges material needs: a starving, homeless person is going to think about enlightenment/spiritual wholeness as fairly low on their list. While we should’t be greedy or selfish, its reasonable to want a home, a job, food, etc. and anyone who works to provide this for others is to be lauded.
As for working for the betterment of mankind and struggling agains those whose beliefs and actions are in opposition to my own and against the betterment of society, I still don’t have the complete solution in my head. Respect them, but work to change their beliefs and actions. If they won’t change, take their power from them and give it to others (i.e. elect different people).
One point the book made which I thought was very true (I believe it was a quote of the Dalai Lama’s), was that he did not hate or get angry at people who opposed him, it was their actions and beliefs that brought frustration. Should he be able to change these people’s minds such that their actions or beliefs were more in line with his, he could just as easily be friends with someone who others might consider his opposition or his ‘enemy’. How very true. Each and every person on this earth could be your friend, we all have goals and desires that are common. Our experiences have given us different viewpoints on how to make the world better. Only through diligent action and words (not the ranting & raving I’m prone to!) can we change others and bring them to our side (and perhaps sometimes learn from others and change our own beliefs).
Interesting how basic principles of different belief systems agree: The idea you stated from Buddism that it’s not hate of people who oppose you, but rather frustration at their actions/beliefs. Same principle in Christianity–hate the sin, but love the sinner. After all, true Christians believe that *everyone* is a sinner, and it’s not your prerogative to judge. I think many of the fundamentalist wackos ignore this basic tenet! I wonder how much better off we’d all be if people truly adhered to the accepting nature of just about every major belief system, whether it be Christian, Buddist, Jewish, Wiccan, whatever.
May 10, 2005 @ 1:12 pmMost religions and philosophies have a lot in common. In fact, to me, that’s a test of whether something is truly wrong or right to do: do all major religions condone or forbid such an action?
Religion gets a bad rap from fundamentalists of all belief systems. A small number (often of educated, rich people) in numerous societies through history have twisted fundamentalist beliefs to sway masses to their causes and caused so much harm.
The most we can do I guess is not stereotype all members of a religion based on the extremist actions of a few, and work to vocalize a more moderate debate on issues which drowns out the extremists.
May 10, 2005 @ 1:45 pmOM. On a more serious note, my impression of religion is a form of social “glue”: logic doesn’t bind human groups, emotions do.
May 11, 2005 @ 10:09 amI’ve recently experienced a very devastating realization with an extremely close friend after he made a genocidal statement against a religious community. I made a small argument against his statement to try and make him realize that many religions, including his, have used the name of their god to further the opression of other people.
My argument was rebutted with an email full of insults, accusations, and everything else I would never expect to hear from a long-time friend.
I was very stressed to realize that my friend had succumb to the fundamentals of a religion, to the point of translating religious verses literally (but not following the basic tenants of his religion).
Needless to say, our friendship will never be the same because of extreme views of other people in this world.
I must admit that this event truly turned me away from this particular sect of my friend’s religion. I will forever connect his statement, insults, and ideologies with his religion. A prime example of fundamentalist ruining a whole religion by his selfish thoughts and actions.
May 12, 2005 @ 4:51 pm