Some thoughts on God

I have always been hesitant about mentioning God in my posts. I certainly believe in an ‘essence’, in a ‘something’ which is above and beyond us all (certainly me) and yet of which we are a part. Call this the ‘Absolute’, God, Allah – ‘It/He/She’ is all the same thing so a name is not really that important.

The struggle I have is to introduce the subject without getting people offside, because one’s beliefs are so personal. I follow no particular brand of religion – I prefer the more philosophical side of things – principally because I have never liked the idea of being ‘boxed in’ by the dogma and ideology of any particular religion.

Now I am certainly not out to try to convince anyone that my concept of God is the best or the only concept – I stress that this is my concept, seen through my eyes, coloured with my interpretation of my experiences of my life.

Some might not believe in God at all. I am comfortable with that – that is their call. In my case I seem always to have had an ‘understanding’ (the best word I can think of) that God exists. In my understanding God is not a fearsome being ‘up there’ that I must abase myself before. Not at all. ‘My’ God is supportive, omnipotent, all encompassing and one that gave me free will to do as I please, with the proviso that I need to be aware that each and every action, thought and deed of mine will have a consequence – positive, negative, good, bad or neutral. Therefore I ‘create’ my own world, the world I live in with my values and my understanding. This means that it is not God who brings me happiness or unhappiness or suffering. No! I attract or draw these to me by my actions (or inaction) – the Law of Cause and Effect deals justly and follows its course to the end. I am responsible –“I am the Master of my Fate; I am the Captain of my Soul” (from ‘Invictus’, by W.E. Henley).

I ask myself, “Where is God?” If God is omnipotent then there can be no place where God is not present; God must be everywhere. Therefore He must be in me, in you, in birds, in fish, in plants, in fact in all living things. Now I have witnessed death and seen the light of Life slowly fade from the eyes of the being that is dying and I have wondered what it was that withdraws its essence, its energy from the body lying there – that was animated and warm and which is now still and growing cold. Has Life, God, the essence – whatever name It is given, cast off that particular manifestation, like an old coat, because it no longer serves a useful purpose in the great scheme of things?

I don’t know and I will never know. But it is worth thinking about because my beliefs colour my everyday thoughts and actions and make me the person I am, doing what I do and the manner of the doing.

It is all me – I have the free will to do as I please, but I can never forget that I am responsible for my actions and the consequences that inevitably flow from them. Remember the old proverb (Spanish I believe), “Take what you want from life,” says God, “Take it, and pay.”

My freedom stops where yours begins

I wonder if you have ever thought about the true importance of the rather glib saying, “Your freedom stops where mine begins?” It is so simple yet it is actually quite profound and has equally profound implications.

It is at the same time rather vague and yet very definite. To me, this statement has relationships at the core of its meaning. By relationships I am never just referring to intimate relationships but to the broader meaning – our relationship with the world around us; how we deal with our fellow beings.

We all understand this statement and its implications and in our own way we follow it. While I am no lawyer, it seems that this statement is the basis of all laws; it is at the core of our understanding of ‘justice’ – what applies to me must of necessity also apply to you. It is at the core of our understanding of the term ‘criminal’ – someone who by their actions has, by deception or other means, wrongfully deprived me of something which belonged to me, which is rightfully mine or for which I had had a duty of care to protect (this, of course also includes the ‘worst’ crime of all, murder - depriving another of their life). It is at the core of the word ‘cruelty’ – wilfully causing pain and suffering to another being.

I cannot think of anything else because ‘justice’, ‘criminal’ and ‘cruelty’ covers just about everything. The Laws we enact are supposed to help the practitioners of the Law to draw the line at the point where my ‘freedom’ (to do what I like) stops and your ‘freedom’ (to do what you like) begins. This is not always an easy task, hence the plethora of laws, rules regulations and other constraints placed on our ‘freedom’ to live our lives as we see fit.

To understand the statement it may help to recall what Confucius had to say about justice and laws some twenty-seven centuries ago:

“If you govern the people by laws, and keep them in order by penalties, they will avoid the penalties, yet lose their sense of shame. But if you govern them by your moral excellence, and keep them in order by your dutiful conduct, they will retain their sense of shame, and also live up to this standard.”

So should this standard of ‘moral excellence’ come from the top down – from those who govern us, or from the bottom up – we tell those who govern us what to do? Or should we all do the ‘right’ thing?

Interesting.

UN report on Israel’s attacks on their buildings in Gaza

I suppose we can be thankful that this is now a war of words and for a change it looks as if the Israelis have come off second best. At least their moral standing and their ego seems to have been dented somewhat.

The United Nations has just produced a report on the damage inflicted on various UN building in Gaza by the Israeli during their incursion into Gaza in December 08 and continuing into January 09.

Ehud Barak, Israel’s Minister of Defence repudiates the UN’s report. He says it is biased because it does not give enough weight to the restraint the Israeli’s have shown while under attack from thousands of rockets fired by Hamas, into Israel, over a number of years.

This is a valid statement.

But how about the restraint shown by the Palestinians after some sixty years of being landless people – remember that Israel was formed from land taken from the Palestinians in 1946, without compensation? Many were forced to live in that sliver of land called the Gaza Strip, without adequate facilities, shortages of all supplies (because of the Israeli blockades) and desperate overcrowding.

Whatever the Palestinians – through the agency of Hamas and others – do to Israel and the Israelis (and I do not condone it at all) is born out of frustration and anger at the injustice of the whole Israel/Palestine/Middle East saga.

The Israelis are not doing themselves any favours by trying to maintain their high moral tone, claiming that their army is the most moral in the world, against a mounting body of evidence that this is not so.

As in any institution which relies on extreme discipline to ensure its orders are carried out to the letter, the Israeli army leaders (and their masters, the Israeli politicians) must always be guided by the highest moral imperatives. I do not believe this was the case.

There are grounds for believing that the Israeli politicians were thinking about the benefits to be gained, politically in Israel, by appearing to be strong and determined against the ‘enemy’ (Hamas and the Palestinians) just before their forth-coming elections. Remember that the Israeli Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert was at the time considered a lame duck PM, who was allegedly involved in a corruption scandal. He would have wanted to hand over the reins with his party in the best possible political condition.

It is recorded that the great teacher, Hillel (who died in 10 C.E.) summarized the essence of Judaism by saying: “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow humans; this is the whole Torah, all the rest is commentary. Now go and learn.” Another central premise of the Torah (the moral code of Judaism) is the command to “Love your neighbour as yourself.”

I wonder if they told that to the Palestinians? Imagine saying, “We love you and we hate what we are going to do to you – but we will do it anyway.” That is the height of hypocrisy. The Israeli’s know this, which is why they are so upset with this report. It shows them up and they have to see themselves for what they are and how the rest of the world sees them. Very confronting!!

Depression

The other night, ABC television, on ‘Australian Story’ detailed the sad case of a young, attractive and obviously very talented TV journalist, who through a tragic (yet avoidable) set of circumstances, ended up by taking her own life. I am talking about Charmaine Dragun, a Perth girl, who worked for Channel 10.

Now as I see it there are three parts to this unhappy event.

Firstly: it was her choice to take her own life – tragic though it was, no one forced her to. As she saw her life, where she was at that moment, her circumstances and what she saw as her future was all too much for her to bear. That is the really sad part because for every (perceived) problem there is a solution. Life has its ups and downs. That is life, but it is how you perceive the ups or downs, that creates the problem for you. The same or similar circumstances may be a problem for you but not even a minor irritation me – we all have a different outlook on the world and different hopes and aspirations. All Miss Dragun needed was someone to talk to; someone she could trust and who she knew would not judge her one way or the other, to let her unburden her soul.

Secondly: The psychologist who persuaded her to stop all medication has a great deal to answer for. The drugs usually prescribed are powerful and have varying long term effects. To stop taking them suddenly is asking for trouble. If someone feels they must, by all means reduce the intake of the drugs over a period of weeks – but not over-night.

Thirdly: My pet subject – drugs for (what is wrongly called) mental ‘illness’. There is no biological test for depression. A blood sample from a depressed person, when analysed, will not reveal ‘depression’ – there is no such animal. Drugs may help alleviate the immediate effects of depression, but long term use causes another set of problems – principally because psychiatrists have no idea why people get depressed, nor do they know why drugs work the way they do. In this case the girl in question was twenty-nine years old, so she had that period of time to get her mind (note I do not use the word brain) and her thoughts to view the world in a way that caused her to have a negative outlook and so she became ‘depressed’. She could see no light, no joy and for her, no future.

Psychiatrists confuse the brain with the mind and yet the ‘mind’ (or consciousness) is not the brain. The brain is made up from cells and the cells perform functions in the brain. The cells apparently co-operate to enable us to operate our body, to memorise, and generally pass messages around. This is basically a biological function. It is not possible for the ‘brain’ to tell itself what to do, for the individual cells (that make up the brain) to tell themselves which functions they are to perform. This is the ‘mind’ (or consciousness) in operation. We can ‘transform’ ourselves and become a better (or worse) person. This cannot be measured! The ‘mind’ is creative; the brain is a ‘processor’.

The point is that depression has no known biological or organic basis for diagnosis. It is not a medical “disease” and it is not proven to have a genetic basis (see Myers D.G. “Psychology”, 2008; Dr. Craig Hassed, “New Frontiers in Medicine”, 2000; Dr Terry Lynch, “Beyond Prozac” 2nd edition, 2004; Dr Dorothy Lowe, “Depression” 3rd edition 2006; and also Wikipedia). Diagnosis is based on self reported experiences and observed behaviour (American Psychiatric Association’s DSM-IV-TR lists the various criteria). On what scientific basis therefore were the drugs prescribed?

Psychiatrists just do not know! They are trying to do the impossible, to integrate subjectivity (what is in the mind, or consciousness) which objectivity (what can be seen and measured), then prescribe drugs based on their diagnosis. Is this right and is it ethical?

It seems to me and I, very obviously, do not have all the details of this case, that this unfortunate girl was treated rather shabbily by those who should have known better. The mind is a fragile instrument and I for one, am awestruck by this wonderful instrument that we all have. Pumping drugs into it is never going to provide a long term solution to depression.

Thinking a certain way gets a person into a depressed state, so thinking in a different way will get them out of that depressed state.

I know because I have done it – without any drugs. And I am just a very ordinary bloke.

Are you half asleep?

I bet you are asleep!! We are really creatures of habit.

Just to see whether you are actually awake and not just going around in a kind of dazed, half asleep state, like most of us, most of the time. Try what follows.

Which arm do you use first when you are putting on a shirt, or a blouse, if you are female? The next time you get dressed, try using the other arm first.

Now your underpants, trousers or shorts, which leg do you first use? Try using the other one and see what happens.

Now, and this is a big one, believe me because I have tried it. If you are a man, which pockets do you put your wallet, or car keys, your mobile phone, your handkerchief and other things you carry around? Try putting them in different pockets and observe the confusion that results.

If you are female, try using different parts of your handbag to put things and then try to sling the bag on the other shoulder. It doesn’t feel right does it?

Now your shoes and socks (or for a woman, her pantyhose). Which foot do you normally use first? Try using the other one.

With which hand do you hold your tooth-brush to clean your teeth? – for a change, try using the other one. And combing your hair?

There are many other little changes that you can make and the results can be quite surprising. You really have to think – “now how do I do this?” It has the effect of bringing you into this moment. You actually have to think about what you are doing, not thinking of something else while doing what you usually do by habit.

Interesting. Let me know what happens.

Violence

I am writing this post in a warm sunlit room, on a coolish autumn morning (14 C, or so), drinking my morning cup of coffee and listening to a radio broadcast of a Mozart violin concerto. I am doing what I enjoy doing and am at peace, both with myself and with the world - my world. Now my world consists of me and my wife of thirty years, our two children and our four grand children. As far as I know there is nothing untoward going on, each of them is getting on with their lives, husbands working, wives either at (paid) work or at home (working) looking after young children, and children, doing what children do best – growing, learning and playing.

In complete contrast to this I recognise that there is an amazing amount of violence everywhere, in every town, city and country, as is reported in the media on a daily basis. I am sure that it has been going on all the time, it is just that the violence seems to be getting, well, more violent. And I wonder why?

There is certainly less self-discipline evident, there certainly seems to be less empathy with our fellow beings, there seems to be more selfishness, more greed and less patience in every day affairs. There is certainly less willingness to accept responsibility for ones actions – particularly when the results are injurious to others; the obvious corollary is that whatever happens is always someone else’s fault and responsibility.

Now the flow on from this blaming someone else is that ‘they’, (the others), are considered ‘different’ from me, because ‘they’ have made the mistakes which result in the injuries, of whatever sort. They are therefore lesser beings – they make mistakes and I don’t, I am therefore better than they are.

Because I am better than they are (and they are obviously lesser beings than I am) they don’t matter. I therefore have a licence to do whatever I like to them – because they are lesser human beings they deserve what they get – it is their fault – they should not have be there, doing what they were doing, at that time.

This is a very dangerous thought process. This is a ‘gang’ mentality (you are not part of the gang – you are ‘outside – you are different); this is ‘class’ mentality (you are not of my class – by birth, by social standing, by value of possessions etc); this is racism (you are not of my skin colour, you don’t speak my language, you don’t eat my kind of food, you don’t dress the way I do and you, most probably, worship a lesser God than mine).

Not only is there the tendency to violence against such people, there is also the defence, born from desperation, put up by the victims of this indiscriminate and often impersonal violence, perpetrated by unidentifiable individuals or groups. They often decide to attack, before they are attacked – a sort of pre-emptive raid, as it were. Often, however, these victims have no real idea who their attackers were so they lash out and this is when innocent people get hurt and things spiral out of control, with gang warfare, vigilante groups, a call for individuals to be permitted to carry guns and so on. This is a steep slippery slope to anarchy.

The only answer to this is education – it is always better to be pro-active rather than re-active. It means educating people in how to deal with others, in relationships and we all have relationships with someone, and because we are all the same. We all bleed when hurt, we all suffer emotional pain, we all have hopes and aspirations, we all wish to live in peace and to be happy. All this, believe it or not, means understanding the importance of ethics, and the inevitable consequences that will follow, if ethics is ignored.

So like an old refrain, a familiar song, re-sung, I repeat my mantra:- Ask yourself “am I treating others the way I would like to be treated?” Also, ask yourself the question, “if everyone, (yes, I mean everyone), did what I am doing, or propose to do, would the world be a better place?” If the answer to either question is no, then don’t do it.

The solution to violence will not happen overnight, of course, and not everyone will listen, or accept what is said. But a start must be made and ethics really is that simple.

Tanita - the classic cat.

Our family has had some amazing cats over the years, but I think Tanita takes pride of place. The name Tanita is an abbreviation of the Portuguese words taõ bonita – meaning ‘so pretty’. And she was a very pretty short haired tabby. However, as will be revealed she was, shall we say, rather eccentric. Whether she was slightly deranged I am not sure but she had two aversions – dogs and visitors at night. In this regard she was a wonderful ‘watch cat’.

As soon as darkness descended her defence mechanism would click in. If she heard someone approaching the house she would emit a ferocious growl, almost a snarl, an astonishingly loud noise from such a relatively small animal. She would approach the window or the door, from which she had first heard the sound, with hackles raised and measured step. In 99% of cases it was someone we knew. Even so she would approach the person very cautiously before returning to her resting place.

Dogs, on the other hand, she considered fair game, and it didn’t matter the size of the dog.

We had, at this time, a house with a driveway that dipped quite steeply down from the initial road access. Tanita’s favourite place was to position herself just below the point where the driveway started to dip. She positioned herself there because she could lie in the sun on the warm concrete, not in mid-summer of course, but at most times of the year and it was a good vantage place. It was also a perfect ambush position – just like anti-tank gunners position their weapons just over the brow of a rise in the terrain, waiting for an enemy tank.

Local dogs, painfully aware of her capabilities always gave our property a wide birth. It was the odd, unattached, strange dog that drew her ire.

I have seen Tanita raise her head, ears flattened, so she could just peep over the lip of the driveway, without being seen herself. She would wait until her target had just passed directly in front of her. She would change position, tense up and then launch herself at the unsuspecting animal and latch herself onto its hind quarters with all claws extended.

The poor creatures never knew what hit them. They would take off down the road, at full stretch, yelping all the while. A few minutes later Tanita would be seen back at her post, as if nothing had happened.

The absolute classic occasion was one my wife witnessed, while I was at work. She had asked a tradesman for a quote to do some repair work to our pergola. Tanita had been disturbed by the arrival of the tradesman’s van and had retreated to another favourite spot – on top of the pergola. Now this tradesman had a dog, a fox terrier type mongrel, smallish, but much bigger than Tanita.

As this man was walking around, inspecting the work to be done, his dog walked with him. My wife warned him that he should be careful as we had a cat. Without a glance, he gave an obviously standard response, “Its ok. My dog doesn’t chase cats.” Well, my wife had seen Tanita, on the pergola, staring down at this interloper, invading her carefully guarded premises, and sensed that some untoward event was about to unfold.

Before she could explain to the tradesman that it was actually his dog that was in danger, Tanita dropped with perfect precision, like an avenging angel, on to the back of the hapless hound. Quite a commotion ensued.

The dog was eventually found hiding under the tradesman’s van, from which place of refuge he refused to budge, until the engine was started and the vehicle began to move.

What capped off the whole incident, as far as my wife was concerned, was the tradesman’s outrage and offended sense of propriety, “Bloody stupid dog – being chased by a cat!!!”

He had been warned.