I have written about this before – and I do so to relieve my own anger and frustration with those who exploit others for their own (usually financial) benefit. This exploitation and injustice is widespread – it happens everywhere. This apparent universality does not detract from the fact that any and all injustice is wrong. In fact I would go so far as to say that injustice is the cause of most of the social ills that beset the world today.
Injustice is everywhere, in Brazil with the Indians living in the Amazon rain forest; in Australia regarding the plight of the Aboriginals; in the USA and Canada regarding the North American Indians and the Inuit (Eskimos); the Israelis demolishing ‘illegal’ housing and regarding the expropriation of Palestine with no compensation paid to the Palestinians. Then there is the injustice prevalent in China. It seems that property developers are trying to take advantage of the current housing boom in much of China, by forcing out those in poorer areas by bulldozing their houses and claiming the land, while providing no compensation.
Nothing, but nothing irritates, annoys, infuriates and aggravates people as much as injustice. Victims of injustice have a very long memory and can recall in great detail the cause and effect of any injustice they have ever experienced. Right from early childhood a person knows if something is “fair” or not. I am a grandfather and my grandchildren know when something is unfair and tell me “That is not fair.” They are always right. When that “fairness” is breached or overturned, trouble brews. It festers like an infected wound, in the mind, and will burst out in an unexpected way at some indeterminate time in the future.
Unless institutionalised unfairness is acknowledged and clearly and openly corrected it builds up until enough individuals are so upset that a ‘tipping point’ is reached and by some strange telepathy they band together and openly defy the authorities and demand justice. That is what the law is about – justice must not only be done but be seen to be done.
I suggest that the Chinese authorities are creating a great well of discontent by not having an open and fair judicial system where individual grievances can be openly discussed by both parties to any dispute and corrected in a ‘just’ manner. Trying to hide these matters will not make them go away – they are still there festering away and making a great many people unhappy.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The Catholic Church and women priests
What do they think they are doing? Isn’t it extraordinary that the Catholic Church, in the 21st century, is apparently treating the ‘elevation’ – if that is the term – of women to the priesthood by ordaining them as a “grave delict” that can lead to the immediate excommunication of the people involved. In other words, in the eyes of the Catholic Church this is a ‘wrong’ that ranks with paedophilia and sexual abuse! Really? As far as I know, all priests and Popes, past and present, were all born of a woman in the normal manner. Even Jesus was born of a woman. Most men have a very soft spot and a great affection for their mother and most people had their first life experiences and basic education from their mother. In fact there is an old Roman saying “educate a woman and you educate a family, educate a man and you educate an individual.” All the men in the Catholic Church, including the Pope, as with all men everywhere learned from their mother. So why the antagonism against women as priests? They would just be carrying on where they left off, as it were, and instructing and helping people generally.
The Catholics say that because Jesus had only male apostles, only men can become priests. But then no one knows what was in the mind of Jesus when he chose his apostles or what criteria he used for the choices he made. The present church authorities have no idea what the actual, day by day, social situation was, in Palestine, when Jesus is supposed to have started his ministry in, about, the year 30 of the current era. It was after all a very turbulent time in that part of the world. Possibly the situation was too dangerous for women to travel on missions, as the apostles had to do. I know that men (and male children) traditionally tended the flocks of sheep and goats because, I suppose, they were better equipped – physically stronger – to protect the animals from predators. Maybe women had not the time – looking after children and keeping the home for their menfolk as they did.
Women (and the female of the species everywhere) are the traditional nurturers and carers of the young and are better equipped physically and emotionally for the role, than men. After all God created men and women didn’t He? The Catholic Church cannot ignore 50% of the population because of something that is supposed to have happened two thousand years ago. Men and women together would give a far better balance to the priesthood and, I suggest, make it a better organisation. It would also alleviate the current shortage of priests if women were ordained. I also suggest that it is because of this very bias towards males in the Church that the present problems – sexual abuses – are so prevalent. And who knows what happened in the cloisters and monasteries in past centuries before the age of mass media and the internet – men are men and have sexual urges regardless of wherever they are and in what age they lived. Celibacy is unnatural and the effects of trying to enforce it are now very evident.
And what about Mary Magdalene? What was her position in the early Church? She was, after all, very close to Jesus. The Catholic Church needs to rethink its position on women very carefully. Their recently affirmed attitude has certainly upset many women, including my wife.
The Catholics say that because Jesus had only male apostles, only men can become priests. But then no one knows what was in the mind of Jesus when he chose his apostles or what criteria he used for the choices he made. The present church authorities have no idea what the actual, day by day, social situation was, in Palestine, when Jesus is supposed to have started his ministry in, about, the year 30 of the current era. It was after all a very turbulent time in that part of the world. Possibly the situation was too dangerous for women to travel on missions, as the apostles had to do. I know that men (and male children) traditionally tended the flocks of sheep and goats because, I suppose, they were better equipped – physically stronger – to protect the animals from predators. Maybe women had not the time – looking after children and keeping the home for their menfolk as they did.
Women (and the female of the species everywhere) are the traditional nurturers and carers of the young and are better equipped physically and emotionally for the role, than men. After all God created men and women didn’t He? The Catholic Church cannot ignore 50% of the population because of something that is supposed to have happened two thousand years ago. Men and women together would give a far better balance to the priesthood and, I suggest, make it a better organisation. It would also alleviate the current shortage of priests if women were ordained. I also suggest that it is because of this very bias towards males in the Church that the present problems – sexual abuses – are so prevalent. And who knows what happened in the cloisters and monasteries in past centuries before the age of mass media and the internet – men are men and have sexual urges regardless of wherever they are and in what age they lived. Celibacy is unnatural and the effects of trying to enforce it are now very evident.
And what about Mary Magdalene? What was her position in the early Church? She was, after all, very close to Jesus. The Catholic Church needs to rethink its position on women very carefully. Their recently affirmed attitude has certainly upset many women, including my wife.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Never look back
The other day I had occasion to re-acquaint myself with the Biblical story of Lot and his wife (Genesis: 19). Because the Lord was about to destroy the city, Lot was told by angels to immediately leave Sodom, with his family and go to the mountains. Furthermore the angels told them not to look back to witness the destruction of the city (and also Gomorrah). We are told that Lot’s wife could not restrain her curiosity, looked back and was immediately turned into a pillar of salt.
This is a good analogy. It is an encouragement never to look back on past achievements (or failures). One can never live in the past. The past is history; it has gone never to return. The future has yet to dawn but it offers promise and unlimited opportunity. Trying to live in the past is impossible and any attempt to do so just leads to frustration. Referring to past glories and achievements as if they are a justification to expect and seek current, present day honour and respect is nonsense and meaningless. It is as if the adherents to past glories and past heroes do not believe that the present (or unknown future) will ever give rise to other glories and new heroes.
We all like to look back at times, to happy periods of our life; nations look back to their ‘golden years’ – the Arabs to the time of the various Caliphates from the 7th to 12th centuries; Portuguese to their age of discovery in the 13th and 14th centuries; the Spaniards in the 15th and 16th centuries; the British to the days of empire in the 18th and 19th centuries – all countries have their “glorious” past. But always referring to the past is sterile and atrophying – like Lot’s wife turning into a pillar of salt. Nothing grows in salt and a pillar cannot move. Similarly the human spirit cannot be constrained without some negative effect; it cannot be constrained, for long, either physically or by beliefs. It needs to grow and the only way it can grow is through meeting and overcoming challenges.
In this manner and only in this manner will an individual’s potential be achieved and personal fulfilment be gained. We need to grow as human beings and we need to move forward in our quest for knowledge and wisdom which brings peace of mind. We cannot remain static or tied to the past. To do so is a death warrant to any growth and future development of an individual. People, organisations and nations that do just this are doomed to feed off thoughts that have no nutrition for the human spirit and will wither away. Someone who lives only for past glories is not living, they are merely existing.
Let this be your life’s motto: “Never look back – ever onward and upward.”
This is a good analogy. It is an encouragement never to look back on past achievements (or failures). One can never live in the past. The past is history; it has gone never to return. The future has yet to dawn but it offers promise and unlimited opportunity. Trying to live in the past is impossible and any attempt to do so just leads to frustration. Referring to past glories and achievements as if they are a justification to expect and seek current, present day honour and respect is nonsense and meaningless. It is as if the adherents to past glories and past heroes do not believe that the present (or unknown future) will ever give rise to other glories and new heroes.
We all like to look back at times, to happy periods of our life; nations look back to their ‘golden years’ – the Arabs to the time of the various Caliphates from the 7th to 12th centuries; Portuguese to their age of discovery in the 13th and 14th centuries; the Spaniards in the 15th and 16th centuries; the British to the days of empire in the 18th and 19th centuries – all countries have their “glorious” past. But always referring to the past is sterile and atrophying – like Lot’s wife turning into a pillar of salt. Nothing grows in salt and a pillar cannot move. Similarly the human spirit cannot be constrained without some negative effect; it cannot be constrained, for long, either physically or by beliefs. It needs to grow and the only way it can grow is through meeting and overcoming challenges.
In this manner and only in this manner will an individual’s potential be achieved and personal fulfilment be gained. We need to grow as human beings and we need to move forward in our quest for knowledge and wisdom which brings peace of mind. We cannot remain static or tied to the past. To do so is a death warrant to any growth and future development of an individual. People, organisations and nations that do just this are doomed to feed off thoughts that have no nutrition for the human spirit and will wither away. Someone who lives only for past glories is not living, they are merely existing.
Let this be your life’s motto: “Never look back – ever onward and upward.”
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Why whistleblowers are so important
To my way of thinking whistleblowers need to be encouraged. If someone is guilty of corrupt, illicit, negligent, abusive or exploitative activities they need to be brought to account for their actions. If a person is not brought to account then they will forever be looking over their shoulder wondering when they will be found out and when the axe will fall. They will carry a burden of guilt which will weigh heavily upon them, leading to increasing stress and isolation from their fellow beings. No one who exploits others in any way feels comfortable and at ease in the company of those they have hurt or negatively affected – this is a natural consequence of guilt. As the French mathematician and humanist, Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) wrote in his ‘Pensees’, “There is no greater unhappiness than when a person starts to fear the truth lest it denounce him.”
This is the reason why whistleblowers often fear for their lives. They have ‘exposed’ someone’s deepest secrets that they never expected would see the light of day – secrets that are dark and were hidden. Such exposure presents the perpetrator with an image of themselves which differs from their own, internal, picture of whom or what they think they are – everyone likes to think of themselves as a ‘good person’. When someone is caught out and exposed by a whistleblower they are forced to see themselves, as it were, in their ‘true colours’ and they are shocked and enter a state of denial and their inevitable initial response is “I have done nothing wrong”.
They will fight tooth and nail to preserve their image of themselves and to avoid appearing diminished in their own eyes or in the eyes of others. They try to pass the blame to others or to accuse the whistleblower of being untrustworthy and of lying. They fight to maintain a level of trust because everyone, particularly in business or government, must be seen as trustworthy. All worthwhile relationships are built on trust. If a person knows (deep down and because of their actions) that they are not trust worthy, they will not trust others either. Not to trust anyone is to have no meaningful relationships, which in turn isolates them from others. It must never be forgotten, however, that Man, as in Mankind, is a highly social being and is unable to live successfully or for long without some social contact, which is why the most severe punishment that can be imposed on anyone is solitary confinement (think of the self-imposed isolation by the North Korean government and the effect this has had on the unfortunate people of that impoverished country or the Chinese government’s persecution of dissidents and members of the Falun Gong).
To expose a person’s (or a government’s or businesses’) corrupt, illegal or exploitative activities is necessary, not only for society but also for those individuals engaged in such activities. It is as if something secret and unseen has now seen the light of day, which has a cathartic effect by lifting a burden and ‘cleansing’ a person (or organisation) of their guilt. The alternative is fear, and fear begets anger and hatred, and those who are fearful and consumed by hate lose their powers of reason and in such a state seldom exercise sound judgement. A person’s ability to determine ‘right’ from ‘wrong’ is suspended and everything and anything is considered acceptable, which defers the moment of exposure. Again think of North Korea; also BP and their problems in the Gulf; the Chinese government and dispossessed landowners; the Catholic Church and their paedophile priests; the Australian regulatory authorities and highly toxic pesticides banned elsewhere but still used in Australia and so the list goes on. Consider also the many other less than charitable activities exposed by that very useful website at http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.
What cannot be forgotten in today’s unedifying stampede for money and positions of influence is that men (as in mankind) have done these things and that we are all of mankind, furthermore we all share in the multi-various proclivities of mankind. Even if, from a purely legal stand point, any one individual may not be an accessory to any particular questionable activity or behaviour, because of our human nature and the consciousness that binds us all to each other, we are all guilty – we are all of mankind. We are all diminished by such unwarranted behaviour. This is why whistleblowers are so important.
“All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.”
Edmund Burke (British Statesman and Philosopher, 1729-1797)
This is the reason why whistleblowers often fear for their lives. They have ‘exposed’ someone’s deepest secrets that they never expected would see the light of day – secrets that are dark and were hidden. Such exposure presents the perpetrator with an image of themselves which differs from their own, internal, picture of whom or what they think they are – everyone likes to think of themselves as a ‘good person’. When someone is caught out and exposed by a whistleblower they are forced to see themselves, as it were, in their ‘true colours’ and they are shocked and enter a state of denial and their inevitable initial response is “I have done nothing wrong”.
They will fight tooth and nail to preserve their image of themselves and to avoid appearing diminished in their own eyes or in the eyes of others. They try to pass the blame to others or to accuse the whistleblower of being untrustworthy and of lying. They fight to maintain a level of trust because everyone, particularly in business or government, must be seen as trustworthy. All worthwhile relationships are built on trust. If a person knows (deep down and because of their actions) that they are not trust worthy, they will not trust others either. Not to trust anyone is to have no meaningful relationships, which in turn isolates them from others. It must never be forgotten, however, that Man, as in Mankind, is a highly social being and is unable to live successfully or for long without some social contact, which is why the most severe punishment that can be imposed on anyone is solitary confinement (think of the self-imposed isolation by the North Korean government and the effect this has had on the unfortunate people of that impoverished country or the Chinese government’s persecution of dissidents and members of the Falun Gong).
To expose a person’s (or a government’s or businesses’) corrupt, illegal or exploitative activities is necessary, not only for society but also for those individuals engaged in such activities. It is as if something secret and unseen has now seen the light of day, which has a cathartic effect by lifting a burden and ‘cleansing’ a person (or organisation) of their guilt. The alternative is fear, and fear begets anger and hatred, and those who are fearful and consumed by hate lose their powers of reason and in such a state seldom exercise sound judgement. A person’s ability to determine ‘right’ from ‘wrong’ is suspended and everything and anything is considered acceptable, which defers the moment of exposure. Again think of North Korea; also BP and their problems in the Gulf; the Chinese government and dispossessed landowners; the Catholic Church and their paedophile priests; the Australian regulatory authorities and highly toxic pesticides banned elsewhere but still used in Australia and so the list goes on. Consider also the many other less than charitable activities exposed by that very useful website at http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.
What cannot be forgotten in today’s unedifying stampede for money and positions of influence is that men (as in mankind) have done these things and that we are all of mankind, furthermore we all share in the multi-various proclivities of mankind. Even if, from a purely legal stand point, any one individual may not be an accessory to any particular questionable activity or behaviour, because of our human nature and the consciousness that binds us all to each other, we are all guilty – we are all of mankind. We are all diminished by such unwarranted behaviour. This is why whistleblowers are so important.
“All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.”
Edmund Burke (British Statesman and Philosopher, 1729-1797)
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Western Australia and Public utilities.
It is a sad reflection on the modern Australian Society that in the State with the strongest economy – Western Australia – there are elderly people, reportedly dying from cold during the current unprecedented spell of cold weather. Certainly there are many people unable to afford their utility bills. Any why is this? – because some years ago, the then government, saw fit to sell its gas and electricity production and supply capabilities to private enterprise to raise money. This in itself is no bad thing. All governments need money to operate but when money is considered pre-eminent and more important than people, we have a real problem. It must be remembered, at all times, that money and commercial enterprise (and governments) are tools for the benefit of Man (as in human beings) and not Man as pieces on some economic game board to be moved at will for the benefit of money, governments and commercial enterprise.
Public utilities are just that – they are essential ‘public utilities’ for the well being of the community as a whole. They supply essentials – water, electricity and gas. Without these modern society as we know it would not exist. The present owners of the utilities have been placed, by successive governments, in a monopolistic situation. They can basically charge what they like and their various stakeholders want to see a return on their investments. So what happens? The obvious – prices go up to meet the expectations of the stakeholders. The corollary is that someone – the government or more likely the various welfare agencies - have to step in and subsidise the poor and disadvantaged who can no longer afford the increasing costs imposed by the utility providers. This means that the government and private enterprise has to step in and provide funds to support these unfortunate people.
There is a certain (I am sure unintentional) irony in this whole process. We have now travelled a full circle to be back where we started from! The State Government, to raise money, sold the utilities to private enterprise – who, to please their stakeholders, increased prices which the poor and disadvantaged cannot now afford - so the State Government will be required to step in and subsidise the low income earners (through the welfare system) to help them pay for the utility services the State Government sold to private enterprise so as to raise money.
Can you see the sense in all this? This is bureaurocracy and capitalism gone mad. Unfortunately Nature did not see fit to always combine intelligence with a compassionate heart.
Public utilities are just that – they are essential ‘public utilities’ for the well being of the community as a whole. They supply essentials – water, electricity and gas. Without these modern society as we know it would not exist. The present owners of the utilities have been placed, by successive governments, in a monopolistic situation. They can basically charge what they like and their various stakeholders want to see a return on their investments. So what happens? The obvious – prices go up to meet the expectations of the stakeholders. The corollary is that someone – the government or more likely the various welfare agencies - have to step in and subsidise the poor and disadvantaged who can no longer afford the increasing costs imposed by the utility providers. This means that the government and private enterprise has to step in and provide funds to support these unfortunate people.
There is a certain (I am sure unintentional) irony in this whole process. We have now travelled a full circle to be back where we started from! The State Government, to raise money, sold the utilities to private enterprise – who, to please their stakeholders, increased prices which the poor and disadvantaged cannot now afford - so the State Government will be required to step in and subsidise the low income earners (through the welfare system) to help them pay for the utility services the State Government sold to private enterprise so as to raise money.
Can you see the sense in all this? This is bureaurocracy and capitalism gone mad. Unfortunately Nature did not see fit to always combine intelligence with a compassionate heart.
Sunday, July 4, 2010
In Praise of Tolerance.
There is a disturbing article by Sally Neighbour in the Enquirer section of the Weekend Australian newspaper, July 3-4, 2010 headlined, “Extremists with caliphate on their minds, not bombs in their belts”. It is about the Islamist organisation – Hizb ut-Tahrir.
While I have heard of it I will admit that I know nothing about this organisation other than what has been written at various times in the press. Their expressed desire is to return, apparently, to the (presumably) golden years of Islam when the Islamic Empire – if that is the correct term – stretched from the Atlantic coast of the Iberian Peninsula (what is now Portugal and Spain), across the whole of North Africa, the Middle East and as far as India. The armies of Islam invaded and subjugated the original inhabitants of those countries by force of arms and driven by a religious belief (remember this when they condemn Israel for the same thing).
Underlying the expansion of Islam was a spiritual core and a deep learning which gave the world Algebra and a great deal of medical knowledge. It is from the ancient Arab and Muslim scholars that today we have our numerical system including the figure Zero and the decimal system (knowledge they gained from their contacts with India). They understood the principles of gravity and the relationship between weight, speed and distance severa1 centuries before Newton; they measured the speed of light and computed the circumference of the earth to a surprising degree of accuracy. They invented astronomical instruments, navigated the high seas and laid down the foundations of modern chemistry. This was all during the European “dark age”. We all owe the ‘classical’ Arabs a great deal.
But what have we learned since those times from the Arab (Islamic) world? I am prepared to listen and learn but, me-thinks, it is not very much!
The followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir aim to re-establish a caliphate which would include what they naively determine as all Muslim majority countries “including lands previously under Muslim rule, such as Spain and the Philippines”. This is all to be achieved by “grass roots support and military might.” It is also stated that “Christians and Jews will be welcome as long as they submit to Islamic law.” This from a faith that allowed an army lead by Mohammed himself, in 627AD to raid the Jewish tribe of Qurayza and behead 800 men and sell all the women and children into slavery! While this took place some 14 centuries ago if this is what living under sharia law in a caliphate means then they have some convincing to do! And what in God’s (or Allah’s) name is such a caliphate supposed to accomplish? Would mankind be better off – would there be less conflict? The various sects of Islam cannot even agree between themselves - note the continuing conflict between Shia and Sunni.
This very organisation, Hizb ut-Tahrir, according to the article, is banned in the following Muslim/Arabic countries – Egypt, Jordan, much of the Middle East and Central Asia and also in China. This in itself tells a story about the organisation. It does not sound very spiritual to me. It may be religious but it is not spiritual and there is a world of difference between the two – a “religious” priest is not spiritual when he sexually molests children and a religious Islamic leader is not very spiritual when he tells his followers to kill “unbelievers.”
My understanding of Islam – and it is one of the great religions of the world - is that it tolerates all people because all people and all things are from Allah. Nothing can exist without Allah. Now in my English language version of the Koran (Penguin Classic, 1968, translated by N.A Dawood) there is a chapter (No. 35) entitled “The Creator” the last paragraph of which states:
“If it was Allah’s wish to punish men for their misdeeds, not one creature would be left alive on earth’s surface. He respites them till an appointed time. And when their hour comes, they shall know that Allah has been watching over all His servants.”
He “respites them”. This sounds remarkably like tolerance and compassion, references to which can be found in any number of verses in the Bible, in the Bhagavad-Gita and in the Dhamapada (the sayings of Budda). This is Love, unconditional Love for the, so far uncounted, examples of the manifestation of Life that He has seen fit to create on this infinitesimally small planet in an unimaginably large universe. So who or what gives a group of people the right or the power to dictate how anyone should (or should not) worship at the feet of the Almighty if they desire to do so?
The Koran is a book – so is the Bible – so is the Bhagavad-Gita and all books are actually written by human beings (no matter how inspired) with all their faults and hang-ups. Remember that neither Jesus nor Muhammad ever wrote anything themselves.
The whole point of a book – a scripture – is to guide the reader to a higher level of consciousness; to reach their own fulfilment as a Human Being. I am not you – and you are not me. My beliefs come from my heart because I have resolved the issues in my life my way and I have derived a great deal of comfort and inner strength from my readings of the various scriptures – including the Koran. I do not need someone, however noble, however inspired that person may be to tell me how to live my life. That person does not know the troubles I have seen – they may offer advice – but they cannot direct me to live and love in a certain way. That is my problem and I have to live my life my way, not theirs. I am me, not them!
He “respites them”. This is tolerance. This is living and letting live. This is inclusion. This follows the “Golden Rule” to always treat others the way you would like to be treated. Remember He “respites” us all and we are all children of Abraham. We do not need another organisation preaching divisiveness, intolerance and a “them or us” attitude.
The poets often get it right. John Donne, the 16th Century poet and sermonist, penned the famous lines:
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were; any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
Tolerance is the only way - Hizb ut-Tahrir want, indeed demand, that we tolerate them but they do not tolerate us. The followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir need to closely attend the words – “any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
While I have heard of it I will admit that I know nothing about this organisation other than what has been written at various times in the press. Their expressed desire is to return, apparently, to the (presumably) golden years of Islam when the Islamic Empire – if that is the correct term – stretched from the Atlantic coast of the Iberian Peninsula (what is now Portugal and Spain), across the whole of North Africa, the Middle East and as far as India. The armies of Islam invaded and subjugated the original inhabitants of those countries by force of arms and driven by a religious belief (remember this when they condemn Israel for the same thing).
Underlying the expansion of Islam was a spiritual core and a deep learning which gave the world Algebra and a great deal of medical knowledge. It is from the ancient Arab and Muslim scholars that today we have our numerical system including the figure Zero and the decimal system (knowledge they gained from their contacts with India). They understood the principles of gravity and the relationship between weight, speed and distance severa1 centuries before Newton; they measured the speed of light and computed the circumference of the earth to a surprising degree of accuracy. They invented astronomical instruments, navigated the high seas and laid down the foundations of modern chemistry. This was all during the European “dark age”. We all owe the ‘classical’ Arabs a great deal.
But what have we learned since those times from the Arab (Islamic) world? I am prepared to listen and learn but, me-thinks, it is not very much!
The followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir aim to re-establish a caliphate which would include what they naively determine as all Muslim majority countries “including lands previously under Muslim rule, such as Spain and the Philippines”. This is all to be achieved by “grass roots support and military might.” It is also stated that “Christians and Jews will be welcome as long as they submit to Islamic law.” This from a faith that allowed an army lead by Mohammed himself, in 627AD to raid the Jewish tribe of Qurayza and behead 800 men and sell all the women and children into slavery! While this took place some 14 centuries ago if this is what living under sharia law in a caliphate means then they have some convincing to do! And what in God’s (or Allah’s) name is such a caliphate supposed to accomplish? Would mankind be better off – would there be less conflict? The various sects of Islam cannot even agree between themselves - note the continuing conflict between Shia and Sunni.
This very organisation, Hizb ut-Tahrir, according to the article, is banned in the following Muslim/Arabic countries – Egypt, Jordan, much of the Middle East and Central Asia and also in China. This in itself tells a story about the organisation. It does not sound very spiritual to me. It may be religious but it is not spiritual and there is a world of difference between the two – a “religious” priest is not spiritual when he sexually molests children and a religious Islamic leader is not very spiritual when he tells his followers to kill “unbelievers.”
My understanding of Islam – and it is one of the great religions of the world - is that it tolerates all people because all people and all things are from Allah. Nothing can exist without Allah. Now in my English language version of the Koran (Penguin Classic, 1968, translated by N.A Dawood) there is a chapter (No. 35) entitled “The Creator” the last paragraph of which states:
“If it was Allah’s wish to punish men for their misdeeds, not one creature would be left alive on earth’s surface. He respites them till an appointed time. And when their hour comes, they shall know that Allah has been watching over all His servants.”
He “respites them”. This sounds remarkably like tolerance and compassion, references to which can be found in any number of verses in the Bible, in the Bhagavad-Gita and in the Dhamapada (the sayings of Budda). This is Love, unconditional Love for the, so far uncounted, examples of the manifestation of Life that He has seen fit to create on this infinitesimally small planet in an unimaginably large universe. So who or what gives a group of people the right or the power to dictate how anyone should (or should not) worship at the feet of the Almighty if they desire to do so?
The Koran is a book – so is the Bible – so is the Bhagavad-Gita and all books are actually written by human beings (no matter how inspired) with all their faults and hang-ups. Remember that neither Jesus nor Muhammad ever wrote anything themselves.
The whole point of a book – a scripture – is to guide the reader to a higher level of consciousness; to reach their own fulfilment as a Human Being. I am not you – and you are not me. My beliefs come from my heart because I have resolved the issues in my life my way and I have derived a great deal of comfort and inner strength from my readings of the various scriptures – including the Koran. I do not need someone, however noble, however inspired that person may be to tell me how to live my life. That person does not know the troubles I have seen – they may offer advice – but they cannot direct me to live and love in a certain way. That is my problem and I have to live my life my way, not theirs. I am me, not them!
He “respites them”. This is tolerance. This is living and letting live. This is inclusion. This follows the “Golden Rule” to always treat others the way you would like to be treated. Remember He “respites” us all and we are all children of Abraham. We do not need another organisation preaching divisiveness, intolerance and a “them or us” attitude.
The poets often get it right. John Donne, the 16th Century poet and sermonist, penned the famous lines:
“No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main; if a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were; any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
Tolerance is the only way - Hizb ut-Tahrir want, indeed demand, that we tolerate them but they do not tolerate us. The followers of Hizb ut-Tahrir need to closely attend the words – “any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)