So, here I am, looking over the world situation, and I don't just mean the recent little dust-up in Iraq, but I mean EVERYWHERE, from the largest world scares, like Korea's nukes, to the smallest bullshit, like eating meat. And the one thing that I find in every confrontation, is duality.
One side says one thing, one side says another, and thus the idiocy begins. In a lot of these cases, it's really pointless, too (like the meat vs. vegetarianism thing). Each side has its speeches and its rhetoric, its proofs and its denunciations...and each has an almost fanatical devotion to its cause, regardless of happenings. This leads to further and further extremes of action, each of which one side blames on the other, until something big enough to warrant outside action occurs, and then the REAL idiocy begins. The idiom of 'no such thing as bad publicity' kicks into high gear, and we never hear the end of it.
Does any of it REALLY matter? Sure, there are some issues big enough that they really do make a difference, but half the time you only really know what you are told by the media, who are supposedly only reporting (unbiased) what someone else says (biased). The rest of the time, it's heated and emotional attachments to some rigid way of thinking, either philosophical or religious...and this is where the real problems kick in.
Philosophical rigidity is almost impossible to contemplate, so that shouldn't be a problem (though it is). Philosophy implies a certain amount of critical and logical thinking, as well as an ability to consider and debate various points of view without emotional attachment. As such, it seems that you should be able to find a middle ground and an agreement to disagree, at the VERY least. When these life choices become heated arguments, with no real clear cause for the anger (such as in the meat/no meat situation), one has to ask whether it's really THAT important to you that the other person follow YOUR choices. Are you happy? Are they happy? Are either of you hurting the other? Isn't that more important to the human race than some petty ability to say you won?
Religious rigidity, to me, is even more pointless. At least in a logical debate, you can support any point you choose to make with facts and figures from accredited sources. A religious debate is like arguing with the weather: you aren't going to make a difference. Religion, ANY religion, is based purely on faith, that is, blind faith to an alleged entity. None can prove that they are right, none can prove that another is wrong. I can understand the attraction of religion; it gives you something to believe in, and something to explain the things you cannot understand, as well as some incentive to live a certain kind of life. But how important is it that someone believe as you do? What difference is there in your superiority? Your religion is your connection to eternity, and the salvation of your soul is your business...I might appreciate your well-wishings to me, but if I don't believe in your god, what difference does it really make to me if you pray for me or not? And why do you need incentive to live right? If you did, and your fellow man did, we'd all get along better...and maybe some of this wouldn't be a problem anymore.
Especially in the case of religion, to bring this back full circle, the concept of duality is a sham, and the source of all evils. Let's look at Christianity, just because it's most familiar to those most likely reading this. Was it not the sudden awareness of the difference between states of good and evil that started Sin? Does not Jehovah say that he creates both good and evil? Did not even the head of the lower host once sit at the right hand of God? Schism creates dissension.
Let's look over a several religious texts, and see if this carries over:
- Tao: composed of BOTH yin and yang - balance between forces is the answer, not devotion to one
- Cabala: Kether, the Supreme, manifests as both Chokmah the male principle of light and Binah the female principle of darkness...also, Neschek (the serpent) and Messiah have the same enumeration (358)...by the system of cabala, this makes them equal
- Bible: Saint Paul says that the illuminated soul is "not under law, but under grace" (Saint Augustine told us to "love and do what you will")
- Buddhism: states clearly that "All are one in the Buddha" and to "seek the Buddha is everyone and everything"
More random quotes: "Brahman is the slayer and the slain" -- "ARARITA: One in His Origin, One in His individuality, One in His permutations." -- "The Alchemist must descend to every depth, plunge into the fires of Hell, before he can accomplish the Great Work." -- "All is Tao." -- "All is Buddha."
The way to enlightenment is not finding the way that works best for you, but the realization that all Ways are one, and that following only one gets you only part of the way. A Zoroastrian tendency to see things in black and white, either/or, is the downfall of man. It is only by embracing all that we can achieve all.
Well, enough philosophy for one night.