The Separation between State and Religion

In time we will realize that Democracy is the entitlement of individuals to every right that was in its times alloted to kings. The right to speak and decide, to be treated with decency, to serve and be served by people in a State of “love” that is, to serve with one’s work for the development of ‘life’. To belong to the Kingdom of Human Beings without racial, national, social or academic separations. To love and be loved. To die at the service of the whole and be honored in one’s death, for one’s life and work was legitimately valued. To be graceful and grateful. To have the pride and the humility of being One with the Universe, One with every realm of Existence, One with every living and deceased soul. To treat with dignity and be treated with dignity for One is dignified together with All others and Life itself. To walk the path of compassion, not in the sorrow of guilt but in the pride of being. To take responsability for one’s mistakes and sufferings and stand up again and again like a hero and a heroine and face the struggle that is put at one’s feet and in one’s hands. Millions of people, millions and millions of people might take many generations to realize the consciousness of our humaneness but there is no other dignified path for the human being.

The “work” as I conceive it is psychological and political. Psychology is the connection between the different dimensions within one’s self and Politics is the actualization of that consciousness in our practical lives. Religion is the ceremony that binds the connectedness between the individual and the Universe. The separation between religion, politics and science, the arts and sports is, in the sphere of the social, the reflection of the schizophrenia within the individual and the masses. The dialogue between individuality and the "human" belongs to consciousness. The tendency to develop cults resides in the shortcomings we’are finding in life as it is structured today. “Life” has become the private property of a few priviledged who cannot profit from it because as soon as it is appropriated it stops to be “life” or “life-giving”.

We are all the victims of our own invention and each one is called upon to find solutions. The only problem is believing our selves incapable of finding them. We are now free to use all Systems of knowledge objectively, sharing them without imposing our will on each other. To become objective about our lives means to understand that the institutions that govern its experience are critically important. That we are one with the governments, one with the religious activities that mark its pace, that the arena’s in which we move our bodies and the laboratories in which we explore our possibilities are ALL part and parcel of our own personal responsibility. That WE ARE ONE WITH EACH OTHER AND EVERYTHING AROUND US and acknowledge for ourselves a bond of love in conscious responsibility. That we human beings know ourselves part of each other and are willing and able to act on our behalf for the benefit of each and every individual. That we no longer allow governments, industries, universities or any other institution to run along unchecked by the objective principles of humaneness. That we do not allow gurus to abuse their power or governors to steal the taxes and use them to their personal advantage in detriment of the whole. That we do not allow abuse from anyone anywhere because life is too beautiful to do so and that we are willing to stop the rampant crime with the necessary compassion Conscious knowledge is every individual's right. Conscious action is every individual's duty.

Blog Archive

Tuesday 15 June 2010

Elena's answer

Hello Ton,

Thank you for this text, it is always good to add to the knowledge from different points of view. I've taken out of your post your personal comment because it is not substantiated with the texts I've presented and it is attacking me again and not questioning the text. As I’ve said before I have heard enough of your personal attacks, this site is for the discussion of subjects and as much as we are welcome to disagree on the subjects we are not welcome to attack each other personally. I already made that mistake too powerfully in my first participation in the fofblog to repeat it here or let others repeat it. Please leave out the unnecessary words and quote concretely what you're questioning if you wish me to post your comments. I realize it takes a lot more work on your part but it is work what I am presenting here so if you can't be bothered to make the effort, don't bother to post.

This text by Steiner is very valuable in this exploration and contradicts nothing of what I've been saying but I would add that once “Christ and Jesus” are unified in the individual or the divine and personality, the “world of the senses” is similarly imbued with completely different purpose and meaning. If we look at Steiner’s “foundations” we can see that he opened the road for a whole new approach to nature, science, art and society. What he brought forth was precisely the unification of all the different aspects of life under one umbrella: the human being.

I’m happy to be able to state that I don’t consider myself an anthroposophist but a human being and that is because unfortunately in many an anthroposophist we still find the same authoritarian, classicist, racist, academic and economic sense of superiority that separates people from people and Steiner’s work has been dogmatized so badly that the human being is supposed to dance eurythmy and nothing else, paint softly and nothing else, speak and move in a certain way and no other, think, feel and live only in a certain way making of it nothing more than another decadent cult like the Fellowship of Friends and totally contradictory to what Steiner himself proposed.

We live strange and difficult paradoxes, as if we spent our lives “trying to be as children” but moving further and further away from childhood as we go along both individually and socially. Fortunately we are nevertheless renewed each day and what is not possible for one generation is taken up by the next one with renewed strength.

Here is the text you sent in. I do wonder what your own position in relation to these texts is, it would be a pleasure to hear you in your freedom. Attacking me personally is not counted as “your” freedom, it is not even counted as “freedom”. I guess the conditions for a public square to be a public square are that the individuals move beyond their personal misery and care for each other to be able to participate.  This is a completely
opposite approach to the “public” sphere to what we’ve been practicing, an approach to which I hope to add some substantial foundations. No one needs to agree with them and we can each open our own “public square” in another blog, but those will be the rules in this one.
Everything “personal” is welcome in as much as it pertains to what each participant is willing to stand up for without that meaning that they have to attack the “personal” sphere of another participant. Disagreement is handled in relation to the differences in views of the world with the aim to connect, not separate. For those who have the intention to separate, there is no need to join! All “differences” are welcome but no direct personal attacks. What this does is that the participants question each other but don’t hurt each other. The positions are explored but the individual is respected. That is what I wish for this Public Square: that the public remain public and from that wholeness each individual take back his and her references. We each argue for what we each believe but that doesn’t mean anyone of us is more right than the other, it simply means that no matter how right or wrong we all are, we can still share in this forum with protection to our individuality. THAT IS COMMUNITY. We are One.  
*
Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)