In the Gospels, Jesus exhorts people who publicly show their piety and generosity by proclaiming: 'those who do so get their reward among men. To those who pray in private, or give alms without recognition, these receive their reward in heaven.' This is usually understood to mean that we should not brag of our piety, for it is then not an act for God, but for our own enhancement. But I believe it also works another way.
Looking at the international scene - a mess, as always, as presented in the news - it is obvious that some nations act out of kindness, or discretion, or deferred power to gain their reward among other nations. What is also obvious is that this reward is seldom given, or if so, the profit from such rewards is brief and ephemeral. And so to the parable: not only will acting in pious ways not impress God when done for public consumption, but so in the broader world such actions will not be awarded the benefits hoped for. The world at large is not a generous or understanding place; the world at large in not one's village or group of friends and churchgoers who might be impressed by pious acts. The world at large, like the public alms giver, wants not piety, but results. It is a selfish world, and acts of generosity on a large political scale are almost always met by others who do not share this vision with grabs for power from what they consider is the kindly nation's public display of lack of strength.
Such it is that we are back to the model of "different dimensions." Although this is a model with sci-fi implications, it does work with traditional religions to describe what we might expect from our attempts to fulfill religiously-held convictions. When Jesus exhorted us to give up our cloaks and to turn the other cheek, he did not say that our reward for such pious acts would be met with a reward on earth. The earthly dimension is a selfish place; to go beyond human expression of this, the world is a blood-sucking place: each takes advantage of an opportunity to satisfy its needs, just as the mosquito does. And while it is true that some animals work with their hosts for the benefit of both - such as intestinal bacteria and honey bees - this is not because of a conscious act of piety. It is also true that the eco-system at large gives benefits beyond what is seen on the individual level - the culling of the herd by wolves is better for the caribou overall, but it would be hard to convince the lame victim of that.
By this I mean that we must not only NOT expect our reward here on earth for selfless acts, but that we should expect the opposite - the loss of what we consider important on earth. The person who gives all his stuff away will become poor, and the nation that will not act in its own defense will fall. That is the rule of this dimension. It is more acutely stated in Buddhism: one must rid oneself of ALL desire to achieve heavenly status. In that, the aspiring monk gives up sex, begs for the smallest morsels of food, lives in the open, and in general has absolutely nothing to lose because he has gained absolutely nothing in material terms through his efforts. Similarly, nations which act from selfless intentions should also expect to lose power, and eventually autonomy. This is a part of the greater law of our dimension. It is true that leniency at times is rewarded with gratitude, but if it is not balanced with definite signs of power, the power that it has will be lost, absconded by those who value it more.
Such are the mechanics of dimension shifting - you cannot expect your reward in this one AND in that one; a house divided cannot stand; it is either God (however defined) or Mammon. If you believe you are a good person, and then become angry when you are then mistreated, you have been working for a reward in this dimension. And that is what the script is: if you wish to ascend to a better dimension, you must give up the other (although Islam and Hinduism fudge a bit on this - but that is another discussion). They operate on different rules.
Now, enter the evolutionist school of spirit. Here we might expect a breakthrough. In the time of Jesus, one might get praise from one's village and from fellow Jews or Philistines or whatever, but that would mean absolutely nothing to the Romans - they would simply exploit weakness towards their own end. And so it is among the "community" of nations now. However, science is binding us closer and closer, whether we like it or not. In time, it might be that the village truly becomes global - that the kindness of one nation might be judged by a universal morality, and thus receive its reward on earth. If that were to become universal, might we not all be nudged to act from this different dimension of world-denial and generosity, even though it is for earthly rewards? And if so, could we become so conditioned to acting in this way that it becomes natural, and we are indeed ushered into the other dimension, the heavenly one where sucking blood is not the base rule? This is what the one-world dreamers hope for, and maybe it will be so, but how far we still are from that now. I believe here we are faced with three broad questions: can this utopia be brought about by mechanical means alone, or is some form of spiritual power necessary as well? If so, will this come naturally from the mechanical changes, or will the forces of individual will and choice still be necessary? And if so, how likely would this be? A discussion for another day. FK
Looking at the international scene - a mess, as always, as presented in the news - it is obvious that some nations act out of kindness, or discretion, or deferred power to gain their reward among other nations. What is also obvious is that this reward is seldom given, or if so, the profit from such rewards is brief and ephemeral. And so to the parable: not only will acting in pious ways not impress God when done for public consumption, but so in the broader world such actions will not be awarded the benefits hoped for. The world at large is not a generous or understanding place; the world at large in not one's village or group of friends and churchgoers who might be impressed by pious acts. The world at large, like the public alms giver, wants not piety, but results. It is a selfish world, and acts of generosity on a large political scale are almost always met by others who do not share this vision with grabs for power from what they consider is the kindly nation's public display of lack of strength.
Such it is that we are back to the model of "different dimensions." Although this is a model with sci-fi implications, it does work with traditional religions to describe what we might expect from our attempts to fulfill religiously-held convictions. When Jesus exhorted us to give up our cloaks and to turn the other cheek, he did not say that our reward for such pious acts would be met with a reward on earth. The earthly dimension is a selfish place; to go beyond human expression of this, the world is a blood-sucking place: each takes advantage of an opportunity to satisfy its needs, just as the mosquito does. And while it is true that some animals work with their hosts for the benefit of both - such as intestinal bacteria and honey bees - this is not because of a conscious act of piety. It is also true that the eco-system at large gives benefits beyond what is seen on the individual level - the culling of the herd by wolves is better for the caribou overall, but it would be hard to convince the lame victim of that.
By this I mean that we must not only NOT expect our reward here on earth for selfless acts, but that we should expect the opposite - the loss of what we consider important on earth. The person who gives all his stuff away will become poor, and the nation that will not act in its own defense will fall. That is the rule of this dimension. It is more acutely stated in Buddhism: one must rid oneself of ALL desire to achieve heavenly status. In that, the aspiring monk gives up sex, begs for the smallest morsels of food, lives in the open, and in general has absolutely nothing to lose because he has gained absolutely nothing in material terms through his efforts. Similarly, nations which act from selfless intentions should also expect to lose power, and eventually autonomy. This is a part of the greater law of our dimension. It is true that leniency at times is rewarded with gratitude, but if it is not balanced with definite signs of power, the power that it has will be lost, absconded by those who value it more.
Such are the mechanics of dimension shifting - you cannot expect your reward in this one AND in that one; a house divided cannot stand; it is either God (however defined) or Mammon. If you believe you are a good person, and then become angry when you are then mistreated, you have been working for a reward in this dimension. And that is what the script is: if you wish to ascend to a better dimension, you must give up the other (although Islam and Hinduism fudge a bit on this - but that is another discussion). They operate on different rules.
Now, enter the evolutionist school of spirit. Here we might expect a breakthrough. In the time of Jesus, one might get praise from one's village and from fellow Jews or Philistines or whatever, but that would mean absolutely nothing to the Romans - they would simply exploit weakness towards their own end. And so it is among the "community" of nations now. However, science is binding us closer and closer, whether we like it or not. In time, it might be that the village truly becomes global - that the kindness of one nation might be judged by a universal morality, and thus receive its reward on earth. If that were to become universal, might we not all be nudged to act from this different dimension of world-denial and generosity, even though it is for earthly rewards? And if so, could we become so conditioned to acting in this way that it becomes natural, and we are indeed ushered into the other dimension, the heavenly one where sucking blood is not the base rule? This is what the one-world dreamers hope for, and maybe it will be so, but how far we still are from that now. I believe here we are faced with three broad questions: can this utopia be brought about by mechanical means alone, or is some form of spiritual power necessary as well? If so, will this come naturally from the mechanical changes, or will the forces of individual will and choice still be necessary? And if so, how likely would this be? A discussion for another day. FK
RSS Feed