Thursday, January 22, 2015
Hear no prophets
When considering a partner -- whether it's a college crush-turned-boyfriend or a traditional arranged-marriage type scenario -- we try to answer certain questions. How does this person fit into my life? Is he kind? Is she funny? Do we value education/financial security/hobbies about equally? And so on.
Then we leave a little room for uncertainties. Markets may crash so jobs are lost, people fall sick without warning. Life happens. The future is uncertain, and so we hedge our options in the here and now. My boyfriend cares for his grandmother, so he's probably going to be kind to our parents as they age. She volunteers to read to the blind, she'll probably be a good mother to a disabled child. And so on.
The future is a mystery. There are risks. Etc. And so we make our choices in the present with these things in mind. Some assume that our actions now are a good karma stockpile for the future. Others say that all we have is the here and now.
To quote the cliche: Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery. Today is a gift. That's why we call it the present. Break that down some more, and the present turns from this day to this hour, this second, this moment. Only now.
And so we choose a lover or a spouse to share our life based on moments.
I wish more of us would do the same when we choose a religious leader to follow. Does my faith distance me from the people I love? Is my religion disconnected from the life I live as a regular human being in the world today? If I had to choose, at this moment, between my family and my faith, which would I pick?
Recently, a 17 year old girl with a highly curable form of cancer refused chemotherapy because her religious faith forbade her from filling her body with toxins. In another context, this same girl might say her God placed all life on earth with a purpose. So was her purpose to die at 17, or was it to cure cancer at 45? We might never know, because a court overruled her decision and she's receiving treatment.
The trouble with such faith is that it drowns out the possibilities. Life emerged from randomness -- a beautiful, miraculous coming forth of molecules in perfect harmony. When we focus single-minded on a certain faith/ religion/ guru, we lose the diversity that comes from seeing the big picture.
Serendipity -- and yes, miracles -- stem from remaining in the infinite potential of now. Stick your head too far into the clouds, fill your ears with the ringing of a prophet's voice, and you might miss the soft strength of the earth you stand on, the very earth that lifts you high enough to reach the clouds in the first place.
That earth is ground reality -- the people that tend your basic Maslow-ian needs. Just for today -- for this moment, NOW -- try this: Feel the ground beneath your feet. Drown your beliefs. Hear no prophets.
They promise that their voices will ring through all eternity. But the earth slips away.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The trouble is people pick their religion as an insurance policy with an eye on the big rewards in the future. And when your policy is big, you are more willing to pay the higher premium that comes with it. I wish we didn't have religion but every society that ever existed has had some form of belief in the mystic, the divine and the occult. To me it seems that it is perhaps a necessary evil - source of hope and comfort in a world filled with uncertainity.
These are things that I think must be based on people's choices and I truly wish they would make sensible choices... But at some level I disagree with the court's decision. I think as a society our duty should be give people an environment where they can make the right choices. But I do think people must have the right to their life (and death), as foolish and questionable as that choice might be.
I don't know what the point of this post is because I am not even sure what your stand is but just wanted to say this in any case...
The trouble is people pick their religion as an insurance policy with an eye on the big rewards in the future. And when your policy is big, you are more willing to pay the higher premium that comes with it. I wish we didn't have religion but every society that ever existed has had some form of belief in the mystic, the divine and the occult. To me it seems that it is perhaps a necessary evil - source of hope and comfort in a world filled with uncertainity.
These are things that I think must be based on people's choices and I truly wish they would make sensible choices... But at some level I disagree with the court's decision. I think as a society our duty should be give people an environment where they can make the right choices. But I do think people must have the right to their life (and death), as foolish and questionable as that choice might be.
I don't know what the point of this post is because I am not even sure what your stand is but just wanted to say this in any case...
Su, I love the idea of religion as insurance policy :). I understand the need for a belief in the mystic/divine/occult; the problem, to me, is when it gets in the way of our fundamental humanity: kindness, empathy, attention to the people around us.
The court's decision was actually debated in several law classrooms around the country, some interesting opinions popped up :). Overall, in this particular case, I agree with the ruling. People should have the right to their life and death. But those too immature to make such decisions are not permitted to make bad choices in any case. To allow this girl to refuse treatment would be the equivalent of allowing a toddler to stick his fingers in an electrical socket, or allow a young child to stay with an abusive parent because they have known no other life. We remove children from dangerous situations for their well-being; the court did the same thing here. For an adult, I'd say it varies. A while ago, a 29 year old woman choose to refuse cancer treatment for other reasons -- to me, the choice seemed reasonable.
Post a Comment