| |
Since I first started discussing my ideas about
politics and spirituality with various friends,
colleagues, acquaintances and people I met by chance,
I would get a variety of reactions. These reactions
went from intense enthusiasm to utter disbelief.
But what would come through with each reaction was
not that they differed from person to person, I
anticipated the extreme range of opinions, but the
intensity with which each person held their specific
opinion. There was really never anything tentative
about what each person believed and felt. While
most were willing to listen to what I had to say,
once someone's opinion had been set there seemed
little room for change. This was true even for some
of the people who at first were open to new perspectives
and ideas, but once the discussion brought into
question some of what they perceived to be their
core political or spiritual beliefs, the conversation
came to an end.
There is always a limit to how open to new ideas
or new ways of interpreting the world any of us
are willing to be. This seems to be true about many
people's basic beliefs. The belief systems set early
in life often seem to become rigid, staying with
us and coloring our perspective of personal and
world events that occur throughout the rest of our
lives. These belief systems that we hold on to can
run beyond what we normally perceive as left or
right, liberal or conservative, communist or fascist.
We can perceive ourselves in terms of any of these
ideological systems and still have an openness that
could enable us to realize that we can go beyond
any initial understanding of our political selves.
On the other hand we can change our ideological
perspective and still remain stuck in the same political
belief system. For example, there are the often
cited cases of people on the ideological left, anywhere
along the spectrum from liberal to radical, who
became warriors of the right leading the attack
against the ideas that they once supported without
question. Even though their ideas may have changed,
what didn't change was the rigidity and ideological
purity with which they held their beliefs. Their
core belief system was that there could only be
one right way to see the world. When an individual
with this kind of absolutist belief system begins
to doubt or question the ideas they once held so
dearly, the only option that remains open is to
reject all of the now doubted ideas and concepts
and to embrace their polar opposites. The same remains
true with religious or spiritual beliefs. When the
belief in a "truth" is absolute, after
any doubt arises the true believer must find another
absolute truth.
What led me to this line of thought was a response
I received from a long time friend about the article
I wrote for the March issue of LifeSherpa.
What seemed to concern him was that by blurring
the line between politics and spirituality we open
the door to the kind of religious and political
fundamentalism that motivated the recent terrorist
attacks in this country. The blurring can also provide
a fertile ground for the kind of thinking that underpinned
the totalitarian societies that have characterized
too much of our recent history. But the problem
wasn't that the line between politics and spirituality
was crossed over, but that it was accompanied by
an absolutist core belief system.
When an understanding of politics and spirituality,
as well as art, literature, food or anything else,
is part of an absolutist vision of the world, it
is bound to develop in destructive ways. In order
to maintain this absolutist perspective it is inevitable
that a "we" and "they" mentality
be developed. Because if you know the truth, and
someone out there disagrees with you, they have
got to be wrong. It seems that most people are not
comfortable with the idea of there being more than
one truth. Since the existence of a possible alternative
truth will bring into question whether your own
brand of truth is the "one", all the others
have to be eliminated.
Though if you approach the "truth" with
an open mind, and are willing to doubt and question,
then there is much less danger of your developing
a narrow and restricted notion of politics, spirituality,
or anything else. This leads me back to the person
who raised this issue to me in the first place.
While he has moved away from the positions that
are associated with the fundamentalist Christian
perspective he was raised in, he has still remained
faithful to his Christian background and in many
ways is still quite conservative. But he is one
of the least ideologically absolutist people I have
ever met. In our years of friendship I have seen
him wrestle with many concepts and perspectives
that at first appeared as being essential to his
worldview. By approaching each situation with an
open heart and an open mind, he has been able to
turn some of those concepts and perspectives upside
down. In those cases where his searching has reaffirmed
his ideas and beliefs, he has been able to hold
on to them with a greater degree of strength and
conviction.
As I find myself questioning all of my comfortably
held perceptions, and see so many around me doing
the same thing, I have to keep on reminding myself
that this being in a state where there is a constant
feeling of discomfort, doubt, apprehension and rootlessness
is a good thing. It is the beginning of the process
that we and the world need to go through if we are
going to find the way out of the state we currently
find ourselves in. To go through all this to only
turn back towards our absolutist truths is not only
a waste of all our efforts, but dangerous as well.
Instead of our opening up, we might only end up
averting our eyes from the potential promise and
danger, and become unable to move from where we
are standing out of the fear that when we take our
next step there will nothing out there to put our
foot on. When we have an openness to explore the
next step, we can maintain our balance on the standing
leg as we take that next step. By giving ourselves
the chance to search for solid ground, we can begin
to move forward.
|
|
