Compromising Truth

Compromising ‘truth’ will deconstruct the ethos to concoct measurable facts to contest its foundation. The act of compromising carries with it the notion of temptation that we are well aware of its consequences should we choose to exercise it. This is our human challenge which we consistently face in making daunting decisions to appease the pride of the many. As it’s never an easy task, we needed to grow in appreciating, and understanding the depth in the value of ‘trust’ that must be defended should ‘trust’ be that human quality to guide us into salvation.

We often take “shortcuts” to resolve issues that can only be short lived. Political scenes today reveal opposing parties that have never been so desperate in their attempts to wrestle for power. When in power, promises would fall prey to compromise where deals are negotiated behind doors. Compromising is not entirely a bad thing. It can deliver a fair agreement for all, if not the majority. However, there are inescapable consequences when morality is violated.

Lawmakers/politicians are skillful in twisting the truth that makes them infamous for wearing many faces. It’s in man’s manipulative sway where I am certain when the act of compromise is on the cards for the taking, guilt will tarry in the conscience. And, the guilt builds up layer by layer over time.

A recently released movie called, “The Two Popes” is worth the watch. The underlying message resonates with the topic of discussion written here. Featuring Sir Anthony Hopkins as the incumbent Pope Benedict, and Jonathan Price as Cardinal Bergoglio as the next Pope to take the helm. Their confessions delineated the circumstances of the decisions they made as stewards of God that affected many innocent lives. The Pope thought the Cardinal compromised his faith by keeping his silence during the political upheaval in his country (ie. Argentina) some thirty years ago. But, the Cardinal defended his actions indicating it was not compromise, but improvise whilst his faith in God remained unchanged. Nonetheless, in desperation the Cardinal did appease the pride of his aggressors in order to hold back their murderous rampage. Even then, the thought of it was disturbing. In silence, the emotional strain took its toll on the Cardinal. Is it a case when trust was compromised?

Comparatively, Pope Benedict suffered from a certain kind of guilt too for his action of inaction which saw clerical sex abuse persisted in his Church. Pope Benedict was known to be steadfast in the faith, and unwavering devotion to the rules. On that basis, he chose not to take further action against the transgressors believing his trust in God would prevail over the predicament. In contrast to the Cardinal’s taking matters into his own hands, the Pope opted to clasp his hands in prayer to resolve imminent troubles, and threats. Ironically enough, the Pope’s uncompromising stand compromised him. The undoing was his inaction. All the same, guilt weighed heavily on him too. Is it possible to allow trust to compromise us as it did with the Pope?

Assessing the two minds, it’s worth mentioning the different views they have on God. As I see it, the Pope believed in God. The Cardinal believed in God in him which could easily suggest the God that the Pope held true to his belief is next to non-existent. That is a matter of personal interpretation. However, shouldn’t one stay resolute in God, or the idea of it just as the Pope did? No questioning, no judgement, and no doubt. Or, is blind faith a mistake? If there is such a thing as a ‘mistake’.

You may have heard of the saying, “life is an illusion”. It’s a cliche thrown into general conversations without much thought. Life is an illusion because we live in the lies that we made for ourselves. Somehow, man draws comfort from that. Realising the dishonesty is getting out hand, faith steps in to defend truth. This is an insult to humanity by introducing a third party called “God” to defend our lack in faith, or commonsense. Why do we need to create the fear in God to keep the faith in order to defend truth? Why do we often struggle to stay close to the truth? It is because we can’t handle the truth (recalling Jack Nicholson making that statement in the movie ‘A Few Good Men’, 1992).

Spiritual masters like Buddha, Jesus and Prophet Muhammad had open dialogues with their disciples to unravel the mysteries of life. We should continue to do the same today to serve soul searchers of this era. We need to intellectualise life’s mysteries to bring better meaning that is acceptable to help us reach peace of mind.

Example, the term “enlightenment” regularly crops up in spiritual talks. It’s to supposedly describe something great. So great, and powerful that only our imagination can take us to its meaning. In other words, we don’t know what it means. I certainly can’t say that I do. “Enlightenment” is  the ability to analyse life’s events, and circumstances from a lighter stand, hence the name. If it’s in any other way, the opposing will weigh heavily on the emotions. Seeing life’s issues as lightly as the weightless ray of light will pave the way to a peaceful mind. Here’s another, what is the secret of life? The secret is to have none. For each secret that you hide, you lose a part of your innocence. Do you see how the answers point back to  the questions? It’s because the questions were articulated to suit the answers that already existed, but yet to be known in a measurable definition. It’s with this reason that we find ourselves falling short in our admission to the truth even though the question that is engineered is the answer.

Truth is where love resides. They share the same quality. Truth, or love is not tangible. Man in his egoistic nature has given into temptation to tangibilize the intangible in order to create definitions of right and wrong, black and white, or stupid and clever, etc. We differentiate our existence to create conflict, and argue about it.

Here is another conundrum which I made up, “To understand love is to let go of it”. 

Advertisement

S.O.S

Civility is the pride of humanity that has stood the test of time. It’s code of conduct remains challenged. Social divide is spreading, and the fear of uncertainty is testing our faith in the civil values that we embraced. It would seem the appeal for love is diminishing. Love is a trend which is becoming harder to sell. Hate is breaking into fashion obstructing wisdom in its path. For our civilization to sustain, love must apply to soften the hard stance of hate. A remedy to allow wisdom to shape a better future.

Hate is rigid, as it is hard. It incites anger, and anger has the effect of collateral damage. Not all anger is the same. Anger with a grudge is particularly dark. It distils from hate that has the element of revenge lodged in the mind to serve only to an unending affliction to self, as well as others. Revenge grips the mind, and provokes the emotion by taking the notion to a level more personal than it deserves which lacks content, and meaning. Intemperance will not open doors to wisdom. The idea of kicking down, and breaking doors won’t give the same emotional effect as opening them with a key. When the wisdom door is damaged, so has its purpose. A broken door is useless as it allows effortless entry without trials. The worthy walks through the doorway of wisdom feeling accepted without having to break anything. It’s our life’s purpose to mend doors to resolve resentments. Though the cycle can be repetitive, but in good conscience love will touch our senses to soften our approach to open the door by turning the key. In that given solace, prisoners of conscience that we are will walk away with a breath of relief each time a fractious thought is allowed to be released from its bind. When this thought vacates, love takes its place to free us. Imagine a sponge in its natural form ready to absorb water. Be like that.

Anger is a derivative of hate, and the other is vanity which is born of pride. Both are equally self-defeating. Somehow God’s mind has a conscience of mercy to guide us through mishaps in order to realise our erroneous exploitations. God has contingency to write the wrongs when we have a reroute with insolence. Merciful He is, but God’s patience has limitation. Since the known of time, the process of ageing is designed to negate the affection for vanity in redeeming God’s will. God’s patience runs along our life journey. Ageing will make anyone realise what they think of the undying lust for vanity, do die. As hate will face shame, vanity will face emptiness. The fad for having a complex is transitory, but it’s a make belief that will leave anyone feeling lonely. God’s mercy reliably rides with us throughout our lives, but it will run thin should we continue having repetitive run-ins with mending our wisdom door.

In our peril, religion comes to our aid when we needed a spiritual guide to help build a sense of hope over senseless hype. Somehow, in our credulous nature, believing in a greater power provides comfort. In humility, we re-established our relationship with God, a higher intelligence in exchange for a sense of security, and eternal protection.

The mind of God is framed within the inception of time, and its demise. In this domain, where space, and time spread defines His imagination. God’s imagination is so far reaching that we will always be trailing in its wake. If the idea of God is omnipotent, then He doesn’t need us to defend Him, or do His bidding, or even bribe Him with love. We have dug ourselves so deep in guilt that we would devise a scheme to bribe God with love in exchange for what is conceived as “unobstructed” passes. Obviously, we will fail to take the bluff to God because our mind sits within His. It’s our intimate nature to commit bribes that will ultimately bring deceit upon ourselves. We know God knows our deepest desire because we orchestrate His thoughts. In other words, by offering God with the gift of ‘love’ with the expectation of a reward in return is a deception that will ultimately prove that we’ve mislead ourselves. Why would God accept our gift? Because, it’s a bait to tempt Him. Temptation is the proclivity to indulge in our weakness that we are warned to refrain. In our action without rational thought behind it, we’ve insulted God and succeeded in reducing His Almightiness to a notch lower. If God is supreme, He doesn’t need anything from us.

If any offering to God has no significance, then we must be standing on weak ground. Our fate hangs in a balance should God cannot be appeased with gifts. So, where do we stand?

We stand by each other.

Just as God stands by us with His mercy, we return the favor by standing by our fellow men. The exchange of gifts is different between God, and Man as opposed to Man, and Man. If you think it’s the same, then your God is a corrupt one.

There is place where the ground doesn’t crumble beneath us. A place of meaning where we learn to love from our hearts in appreciation by coexistence within the spread of God’s domain. Here is where self-sacrifice is rendered without condition, or the need for bribes. When we stand by our fellow men, we grow our love from within, and that itself is gratitude for God’s mercy. God is an illusive reality of its own right. Our existence can only relate to the thought that spreads within the boundary of God’s mind. The mind of play is framed on the game of a snooker table which I’d like to use as a similarity to describe life. Directions, and positions of the balls are predictable from a calculated strike demonstrating life’s karmic law of cause, and effect. For love to be widely appreciated, taking a direct approach to the illusive greatness does not have the same effect as harnessing the love from the spirit of the game. Existence is our salvation.

The depiction of God as ‘Yahweh’, ‘Almighty’, or ‘Allah’ carries the idea of infinite possibilities to those terms. Every religion swears to one true God, a universal God no less. In the pride of upholding religious identity, the term “universal” loses its true meaning. Pride grades God. When religious authorities say that we are one in the eyes of God, but how do we explain the growing division that we are in today? I don’t see a sweeping reform in unity throughout two millennium of human history by upholding the tenet of religions. Instead, religious outfits are trying to outdo each other. Which means, the change that all instituted religions want to bring upon its worshippers is superficial. The true path to lift our faith closer to God is by a personal effort that we can make on our own. It starts from within. To an extend, religious societies have lost their way in unifying the greater population by remedying the symptom, but not the cause much like what medicinal drugs do. The cause will be in a state of suppression. Nevertheless, they do have the recipe in their possession to help worshippers exude humility in knowing there is something in creation that is much greater than themselves. Yet, only we can bring ourselves to recognise this opportunity. To accomplish this process, the recognition of God does matter as it paves the way for our humble act in salutation which matters even more. The act in wanting to reform the mind towards a level of quality in wisdom which must match the sincerity of the initiative. This is essential to the change for a united, and peaceful world that we seek.

It’s not my wish to take anything from the institutions of religion. My intention is to assess, and address our action’s misalignment from our natural desire for wisdom. Unless our perception shifts to mitigate the distortion, we will find ourselves remedicating our afflictions. I am addressing the depth of our need for reform. Our sincerity must be assessed, and put to the test every time before we make our entrance through the doors of temples, churches, mosques, or any places of worship. Put on the attitude which fits the idea of not bringing gifts for bribe. Be more of a follower, rather than a worshipper to accomplish more. Your presence in the company with the congregation of your fellow followers is all that matters. Lest we forget, it’s in the spirit of a mass following that gives birth to religious clubs, and memberships, not God.

We don’t need religion to show kindness, or aggression. The feeling of love, or hate is captured from our personality, but chosen to be in disguise by the cover of religion. It’s a case of human weakness in faith to use religion as an excuse to bail out actions which are actually derived from choices personally made. Somehow, we are drawn to the pretext of religion. Religion is like the clothes we wear that we love showing off so much that in the spirit of sharing that love has been sidelined.

To most of our us, actions don’t reflect the true nature of our intention, because we play to the tune of self-deception. This is where our soul stands apart from our conscious body, and mind. The intuitive mind yearns for peace, but the other chooses fear to stay divided. Fear of the unaccustomed change that draws from our natural defence system. To deliver a clear alignment is the reform that requires honesty without fear. It requires a process in deconstruction of our human make-up to accomplish the challenge that is bestowed upon us. The misalignment is our double standard which makes us hypocrites. Lay your cards clean on the table with nothing to be a shame. This process allows the exchange that will broaden the horizon of our understanding measured by the degree of our virtue. The construction of a meaningful life depends on it. If man walks the path of this humble sway, humanity may be thrown a lifeline, and prevail.

Footnotes:

“No man walks the Earth is without flaw”

“When the wisdom door opens, the mind reaches a level of thinking that no longer perceive certain elements of life that were once feared, and ashamed, whereby setting the mind on a balance in acceptance to any given condition”

Battery of God

Man lives by the trail of his thoughts branching out decisions that chart the future of humanity with time. The facade of our tangible reality is a manifestation of thought. Thought is like a word which can be composed into a paragraph arrangement, and with a multitude of it would’ve a novel written. Life’s grand design would appear to be made in that order of logic. Thoughts transforms our existence, and ultimately defines it. Where does thought come from? The delivery of thought has a pattern which flows like a river just as the way I am now methodically writing down my thoughts in order for you to grasp my meaning. A string of thought is a trail with a point of origin, a source where intention is stored. Tracing on the trail of thought backwards may lead us to that source where thoughts are induced, and regurgitated. I reference the notion of the movement of thought to the design of a battery. When the battery’s two opposing terminals make contact with a conductor, energy is harnessed from its system, and electric current starts to flow distributing energy throughout the closed loop circuitry. Without bridging the terminals, the battery will remain in its chemistry as pure potential ever ready to be tapped, and converted. Our reality exhibits similar fashion as to how a battery works where thought is identified as the electric current, and prior to that is a mixture of chemicals, or electrolyte ready to express itself through intention.

So it would seem that our physical existence is engineered by thoughtful planning although some may argue that life began by chance. That may be, but it can be counter argued that life is engineered to give chance a go. Like the wonder of a battery which is engineered to give a light bulb energy to glow, and generate electromotive force (emf) to turn motors. Akin the battery to God-like will invite sceptics to debunk the proof to the existence of a greater intelligence. Even though a battery demonstrates that it has the capacity to precipitate elements of life, but as long as there is still the slightest of chance to claim that life is an evolution through a sequence of coincidences, God will never be absolute. Yet, we return to this point of decourse time, and time again because it’s intuitively hard to accept the intricate complexity of a perfectly functional life could’ve happened by chance. Imagine Earth as a gigantic battery. A fully functional space vessel engineered to support life. It has two opposing magnetic poles generating a magnetic field which envelopes the entire planet. The magnetic field is known to serve as a protective shield, and possibly the cause that put our planet on a perpetual spin on its axis to centrifuge gravity. Without gravity, the laws of physic as we know it cannot apply. Nothing works without the element of gravity. Someone knew something about gravity, and decided to add it into the ingredient of our existence. I am inclined to think that our lives started from the drawing board. Then, skillfully crafted, and shaped by a higher hand of greater intelligence.

Life’s manifestation is engineered by a concocted chemistry of conscience much like in a battery. How does this collective, or mixture of chemicals come about? Who made the battery? Battery is a god to the God that made it. Who made God? Is it GOD? So, GOD made God who made god who made the battery. God’s ancestral list can be a long one which goes to show when the subject of God is opened to debate it appends possibilities to all probabilities, and improbabilities of a greater intelligence. If this keeps up, extraterrestrial beings could well end up in that list. Here is the talking point which turn the corner. It’s meaningless to think of God. In many occasions apart from what is stated in holy books, God is conveniently mentioned in the attempt to bridge the gap in our inability to explain the unexplainable, and rightly so. If our focus is so intense on the idea of God, we could easily missed the picture of life. Standing too close to anything takes away the greater view from sight. Life is an expression of intention once stood united as a collective conscience. Sensibly, life’s credo should mirror the ecstacy of unity consciousness by inviting, and expressing peace in living along with existence without fear of the ending.

As mentioned, God is not absolute as long as the thinnest slice of possibility is given to chance. The slightest of doubt can deposed the idea of God. Ironically, God frequently return to the discussions making itself valid by riding on that doubt as a hidden notion which could bring balance to the equation of existence. However, the plot can easily flipped over to the side of the argument. Should the notion that life is remotely close to being engineered, then the ambiguity would turn to favour the existence of God in setting up humanity on a measured path with untold destiny. Doubt is standing on weak ground. Much like the conservation of energy that must be respected in the fundamental law of physic. God is the doubtful undetectable latent energy that has inexplicably disappeared, but we know it’s there. The Higgs boson story, also known as ‘The God particle’ travels on similar path. Doubtful in mind, but intuitively they knew it was there in order to complete the mathematical model to the foundation of existence that we stand by. The God that is spoken here is not outward bound. It lies between paragraphs. It lurks in the background between thoughts. It’s without form, but a whimsical spirit that ignites life.

Anything that is engineered as we know has a limited life span, and so is life. The energy that once gave life a start will gradually dissipate from it, and draws back to its source. A 100% redemption would be ideal to maintain the law of God in a healthy balance with sustainability. How efficient every man manages his inherent life is known by the degree of peace that he brings to his existence with himself. The energy in which he fails to convert fully to the love for God will be left behind to serve as remnants of entropy. As life has a given time, so as the battery of God that will one day dry up. Unless, it’s rechargeable. For God to recharge his ambition for humanity, man must return that love.