Tear Down The Walls
There is an old saying in war: “Divide and conquer.” Though the origins of the saying are unclear, the strategy has been around and been used for a long, long time. Separating an adversary into multiple groups allows for two important things. First, injecting strife and infighting to an opponent’s ranks creates confusion, blurs focus, and disintegrates morale. Second, multiple smaller groups are much easier defeated or controlled one by one than a single massive united force.
This strategy is used in politics to keep a citizenry at odds with each other, rather than unified in purpose. It is used in business to reduce the strength and effectiveness of a competitor or even internal forces. It is most commonly associated with the tactics of war, but is just as effective in tactics of “peace.”
No matter whether you feel the current state of world affairs is a struggle over politics, money, or religion — a single fact remains. We humans are a house divided, and a house divided will not stand.
Though politics and money are also at the root of our divisions, my personal goals have little to do with them (except maybe to do away with them altogether). I have no need of a “government” to tell me right from wrong or try to save me from myself, and all the wealth I need is just enough to live comfortably alongside my neighbors who can do the same. That leaves one thing I feel is both important and divisive; religion — the “business” of spirituality.
In religion, there is an old saying: “Seek and you will find.” Those particular words are most often associated with the Bible, but the principle is universally applied in every religion to the human aspect of spirituality (NOTE: the principle does not necessarily apply to reading glasses or car keys). So, I spend quite a bit of time seeking the truth about my own spirituality and how it compares to the common human condition, but what I find is troubling.
The more I learn and uncover about the nature of human spirit, the more frustrated I become with religion. While religions are presented as avenues by which people can collectively connect and commune with the divine aspects of this world, it is readily apparent religions are simply businesses with a spiritual disguise — the evidence being the focus on each one’s individual brand of governance and focus on money as a necessary resource to do the “work” of their respective god. As a result, even religions that arguably started off as a way to unify people toward becoming “better” have wound up in a global menagerie of division built upon division, leaving people at strife with one another clamoring to proclaim their own views are “better” than those of others.
This state of “spirituality” is like placing a million invisible walls between people, places, and ideas — walls that move, shift, and multiply almost unnoticed under the influence of politics, money, and especially religions. Whether this situation is by design or coincidental or a hybrid is for another discussion. I want to focus on the reality that the situation exists, and what we could or even should do about it.
Assuming a higher power does universally exist, as most every religion proclaims and I personally believe, the walls of division created by the religious ideologies of the world does a great disservice to those who aim to seek and find. After all, when most people make a decision to “seek,” their first stop is religion. Some skip around from church to church within a certain religion accepted culturally. Some hop from religion to religion trying to find the right “brand” to suit them, but even finding the right “flavor” and embracing a certain “style” is less than ideal, assuming there is a universal higher power common to all Creation.
Even in a culture of tolerance, where individuals believe their religion is the only “true” one but elect not to crusade against people who disagree, it seems sophomoric and spiritually immature to take a stance that the existence of a universal higher power is a given truth then reject someone else because they call that higher power by a different name, read a different book, or follow different rituals — more walls.
Very few people disrobe from religion and seek spiritual understanding from wherever it may be found, including religions, philosophy, art, simple human interaction, meditation, etc. I am one of those people, and I try to promote the concept that, if there is only one true higher power, it serves us well to approach the subject from a position of subjective objectivity — meaning, these divisions between us on every level, especially a spiritual level, are unnecessary and are stumbling blocks toward our understanding of what this higher power is, how we can apply it, how we can experience it, and how we can move forward as human beings in harmony and solidarity of purpose within it.
I say, “Tear down the walls.”
RSS, Atom, more...
2009/05/25 17:22 -0700Z
“No matter whether you feel the current state of world affairs is a struggle over politics, money, or religion — a single fact remains. We humans are a house divided, and a house divided will not stand.”
Well, what you call the current state of world affairs is the reflection in a distorting mirror which is dedicated to reporting such struggles: further filtered by the elements in that mirror which strike a chord in you yourself.
I take the alternative view that the current state of world affairs is what I perceive personally, rather than allow others to perceive on my behalf. Wherever I go, I see peace and harmony between people. The struggles are so rare that like fish in the sea, they have to be caught by systematic trawling with nets, which is the function of your information sources i.e. the media.
With my own eyes i see no evidence of people rejecting one another for different views. I don’t deny that such things happen, but I can’t see a reason for worrying about hearsay.
On our street the Baptist Church adjoins the Mosque. Friendly relations exist between the respective congregations. I see no wall which requires to be torn down.
Perhaps the problem you describe is local to your area. If so, I’d like to know the details from your personal experience.
2009/05/26 03:57 -0700Z
There is something to be said for ignoring matters beyond the scope of our own person — to exist within that small microcosm of the whole, where life is lived without such a marked discord as one might see in the media. As you say, though, it doesn’t mean such things don’t happen… things like Afghanistan/Pakistan, Iran, Sudan, Syria, bus bombings, embassy bombings, among other myriad “isolated” incidents which may or may not happen directly in front of our faces or within walking distance from our homes. And, from a statistical standpoint, these sorts of acts don’t happen with more frequency than they do happen. Does that make the ideologies behind such any less worth dismantling or any more worth ignoring? I say, “No.” I imagine the victims of such ideologies would say, “No,” as well. In that light, I see a valuable purpose in tearing down the walls — and promoting an approach to life and its source from a perspective of commonality, rather than embracing and proliferating causes of difference.
2009/05/26 04:21 -0700Z
Yes, but what can you personally do? You talk about the victims of ideologies. How do you know they are victims? What can you do to help them? What walls can you see that you can help tear down?
You imagine the “victims of such ideologies” as agreeing with you, accepting your help? Then go on, imagine.
Do you know why a person, in any of those places you mention, fights?
You speak of dismantling ideologies. Good! What ideology can you help dismantle? Obviously not one in a far-off country, not an ideology you don’t know. Only the ideology that you do understand.
Now, how do you “dismantle” the ideology that you know? What is the ideology? What keeps it alive?
What makes you think that bombings are the result of ideology? Are they not a reaction to someone trying to attack or dismantle an ideology, rather than the ideology itself?
2009/05/28 23:17 -0700Z
I guess what I would like to see dismantled is the kind of religious ideology which says, “I am completely sure I know what the higher power is and what it wants.” It seems pretty plain that none of us have all the answers in that regard.
Religions may perform a lot of civic services, but from an ideological standpoint do little except further separate people based on ideologies. I also think an ideology which gives another person the authority to define the higher power and tell others what it’s saying — can be dangerous.
I think it would be more beneficial to just drop all religious differences and focus on universal bonds of the human spirit and all of Creation: this one higher power.
2009/05/29 00:17 -0700Z
Well then, you are another religious reformer. But it’s a big job, Tim.
You may just as well say it would be more beneficial to drop all language differences, all dietary differences; teach everyone the same history, same literature.
The British Empire wanted to do that, not as a conscious programme of abolishing difference, but because it thought its own values and culture (including the Church of England) were superior to those of promiscuous naked cannibals.
Children in Jamaica were taught Wordsworth’s poem “Daffodils”, though these flowers don’t grow wild there.
The thing is that the Taliban, for example, agree with your programme. They want to drop all religious differences etc.
All religions want us to focus on universal bonds of the human spirit and all of creation.
This is why it is better to tolerate them, and never mind the differences.
2009/05/29 07:25 -0700Z
No doubt it’s a big job, but a thousand mile journey begins with a single step.
I have never advocated the termination of cultural differences. The way you describe this, Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Kim Jong Il, or even George Bush could be construed in a sense to be “religious reformers.” However, their bent to impose culture is what makes them “evil” in the eyes of the world. Similarly, the Taliban seek to impose their own political and social values.
That is a completely separate concept from what I’m trying to convey here, and your analogy of me to these sorts “reformers” is just a bit disheartening — through all our conversation, I would think you have a better understanding of where my heart is.
The key in my last response is in the first two lines:
What I oppose is a “programme” that aims to dictate to others and enforce exactly what “God” is or what it’s plan is. This mentality is counterintuitive and counterproductive toward an objective and sincere personal study of spirituality.
2009/05/29 08:26 -0700Z
I was thinking of reformers like Martin Luther, Charles Wesley, George Fox, Francis of Assisi and so on.
You wish to see certainty dismantled, to be replaced by uncertainty? I think there will be much resistance.
2009/05/29 08:55 -0700Z
I wish to see the barriers around the world leveled regarding “what God is.” No one of us truly “knows.” In that respect, I suppose I do support the idea of replacing what I see as a false sense of certainty with a more honest and humble position of uncertainty, on a global level.
The resistance is readily apparent. We’ve been fighting over it for millennia.
2009/05/29 09:44 -0700Z
If you came to live over here, Tim, you’d see that the majority have quietly adopted your cause. Church attendance here in England is much lower than in US, indicating a lesser adherence to particular religious affiliations. Over here, religion is a minority thing, and is strongly associated with an honest and humble position of uncertainty, rather than (for example) militant atheism.
If you lived here, you would say there was nothing to do.
If you lived in this street however, you’d see the level of Muslim attendance at prayers in the mosque - high! And you would not need to bother about that either. It doesn’t cause any problems.
2009/05/30 23:58 -0700Z
it seems to me that the split we see “out there” in the world is just a mirror reflection of the internal split inside ourselves… convinced we are somehow separate from the higher power, God, higher self, whatever one chooses to call it… immersed in the illusions and deceptions of the so-called lower self… selfishness, and downright paralytic fear…
so, what can i personally do?… i can practice and work on my inner path toward truth… healing my own sense of separation that was conditioned into me for so many years by church and religion… perhaps by reflecting something different from my own personal mirror, it might have a corresponding influence “out there”…
as Gandhi said, “be the change you wish to see in the world”.
2009/05/31 01:07 -0700Z
@Vincent: I’d love to pick up and spend a few years on the British Isles, honestly — to broaden my horizons and reconnect with my Anglo roots. But I don’t know that it’s much different here, really. There is a real movement for “tolerance,” which is leading rapidly toward the kind of scenario you describe… which I tend to view as more dissociation than unification. I would advocate a more unified search for Truth, rather than such a distanced sense of indifference.
@joanne: Thanks for stopping by! :) I think you’re right — most often the walls we build up between ourselves are based on inner conflict, which I believe is only fueled further by things like religion. As you say, “be the change.”
2009/05/31 02:45 -0700Z
That’s quite an ambition, to spend a few years here. In missionary activity perhaps? I hear this morning from our religious affairs programme on BBC that missionaries come now from Nigeria to US, reversing the flow of the nineteenth century when missionaries came from Europe to Africa. In particular they were talking about the Redeemed Christian Church of God - RCCG. But it gave me some insight as to the nature of many churches in US: that they are run on business lines. Big difference here with the Church of England, whose income comes from historical land and investments; and which has inherited thousands of old churches (some more than 1000 years old) whose main problem is that they are crumbling & unable to attract big enough congregations. But it has not meant, till now, that some entrepreneur tries to run them at a profit!
You may have a movement for tolerance in US. There is no such movement here! Tolerance is part of the psyche. Of course there are opinions, raging controversies.
You can advocate a more unified search for truth but that means the establishment of a new church, surely?
2009/05/31 02:57 -0700Z
Nice to see you here, Joanne. You are clear-sighted in your view, and the quote from Gandhi is apposite.
For myself though, shocking as it may sound, I don’t wish to see any particular change in the world; and it follows from Gandhi’s admonition that I don’t have to embody any particular change in myself.
I see myself and the world in more organic terms. When I see a seedling or a bare tree in winter, I don’t “wish to see a change”, for I know that the seasons bring change naturally, and that summer’s leaves will also die and be reborn.
However, as a human being I find myself impelled to do more than graze in a field. I find in myself a restlessness that wants to interact with the world, to change it and be changed by it; no longer driven by dissatisfaction, just my intrinsic nature.
So I am drawn to creative work and disputation, feeling that it’s enough to carve my remaining days into a living work of art, without spoiling it all by trying too hard.
Once we can see that there is nothing to do, it’s easier to enjoy what we have.
2009/05/31 07:47 -0700Z
@Vincent: I don’t imagine I would be any more a missionary there than I am here. Rather, it would be a great experience to be infused into the culture, through typical living and labor.
As for creating a new church, it seems the world has enough establishments built around feigned certainty — as we touched on, “unified” in this context wouldn’t necessarily equate to “organized.” I tend to see the unifying factor in this vision for tearing down walls to be a resultant approach of unknowing yet focused on learning and experiencing. In such a spiritual quest, I see no need for organization — just a common state of mind involving openness, service, and love.
2009/06/05 11:15 -0700Z
“It is readily apparent religions are simply businesses with a spiritual disguise…” A lot of contemporary spirituality strikes me as being that way too. I’m thinking especially of the ones with a message that basically runs, “Just follow my program and you’ll have success, wealth and health.”
Joanne, the divisions we see in the world no doubt partially reflect our own state of mind but are sometimes more. For example, the grieving family of a genocide victim, say on another continent, would find my state of mind or yours irrelevant and literally wouldn’t even know that we exist.
Vincent, looking at your first comment on your own perceptions - “The struggles are so rare that like fish in the sea, they have to be caught by the media” - you’re fortunate to be living a relatively comfortable life in one of the richest nations on earth.
It’s true that media coverage plays up and sensationalizes the suffering of people we perceive as like us - for example, the rare phenomenon of the child abduction by a stranger. Media coverage of ordinary people around the world that we don’t identify with - where you can find struggle, strife, poverty and violence in spades - is grossly undercovered. This even includes a nation whose lights the US itself knocked out while leaving five million refugees and uncounted dead civilians in our wake. But our media has mostly lost interest in the continuing plight of the people there. And of course Iraq is just one example of a nation whose instability throws millions of lives into poverty and chaos.
2009/06/06 00:28 -0700Z
Paul, I thought the context was Tim’s initiative to put an end to the “divide and conquer” strategy, in which religious divisions are the particular cause of harm which he wants to heal.
My remarks were not intended as a reflection of the much wider context of human suffering, or even of the way humans oppress one another. If we are talking about that, then there are tragic enough examples on my street, and I dare to suggest, on almost every street.
But if you are talking about relative comfort and relative wealth, then that is another topic again. There may be correlations between poverty and certain kinds of suffering but it’s easy to believe clichéd assumptions that comfort and wealth are universally desirable for bringing happiness.
It’s interesting that you imply an obligation of media to avoid “grossly undercovering” the “plight” of those in other lands: as if the media have an obligation, moral or otherwise, to provide a true picture of the world to those who are in danger of not caring about it. News media aren’t quite like that, and always constitute biased propaganda of one kind or another, like speeches of politicians.
I believe there is an alternative way to discover truth about humanity. It involves direct perception with the senses! In these matters of religion, which are the topic of Tim’s posts, I am convinced it’s the only reliable way, otherwise our understanding is hopelessly distorted by competing agendas scribbling fiction all over the actuality.
I like your final remark, though. “And of course Iraq is just one example of a nation whose instability throws millions of lives into poverty and chaos.” Use other nouns in place of “instability” and you can accuse nations such as USA, of course - which I am not attacking and I don’t think you feel obliged to defend.
2009/06/06 00:30 -0700Z
when I said above “but it’s easy to believe clichéd assumptions …” I meant to say “… it’s too easy …”
2009/06/06 10:50 -0700Z
@Paul: Yes, indeed. It’s almost sickening to see religious “enterprises” that are so blatantly business-oriented. Like the old snake-oil salesmen.
@Vincent: I think you’ve identified a solid point about what I’m getting at, in tearing down religious walls between human beings:
I was coming to a roundabout similar conclusion when I mentioned a “common state of mind involving openness, service and love.” However, it may just be like you pointed out: the things you see, hear, touch and taste give you a sense that my wish for a less disjointed society (specifically from a religious point) is unnecessary or unwarranted — but I can only speak from my own perception.
I do try to keep up with current events and varying points of view. Through the magic of XML and an RSS reader, my inbox is constantly full of differing opinions, from over 75 different sources. What I see in the media and in our “modern culture” as a whole is a plethora of divisions — a large part of which has at least some foundation in ideologies resulting from religious belief.