Living with Passion

The 16th century philosopher, René Descartes, once wrote, "Trying to live without philosophising is like keeping your eyes closed without thinking about opening them."

And, while I don't quite agree with him, what I do agree with is the spirit behind the words. I think that what he is saying, is that in order to live a full and satisfying life, it is necessary to be passionate about something. In his case, it was philosophy.

Which made me wonder what I need so strongly that I am passionate about it. And I came up with four answers: the love of my family and close friends; walking in nature (particularly Salcey Forest, or by lakes, mountains and the sea); reading books; and being creative, whether that is in the form of writing, or crochet, or cross-stitch. When I am engaged in or with any of those activities, I am blissfully happy. I can spend inordinate amounts of time doing them, and never get bored or fed up. Time passes by in a flash and I don't want whatever it is to come to an end.

Which has occasionally got me into trouble... whenever a new book by a favourite author comes out, I am avid to read it, and actively resent any time spent away from it until that first blissful reading is done. Then I go back for a more leisurely second reading, which can be interrupted.

Which doesn't mean to say that I neglect the other parts of my life. My Protestant work ethic is too strong for that. Rather, it means that I get them done and dusted as quickly as possible, so that I can return to my passions. Today, for example, I estimate that I have a couple of hours of work to do, after which I plan to settle down with the baby blanket I'm crocheting for my daughter's yet-to-be-born son, and will probably spend most of the rest of the day on it, stopping only for meals. During which time, I will be as happy as a pig in clover.

What are you passionate about?

Learning through Experience

The French Renaissance philosopher, Michel de Montaigne, was a man after my own heart. He had important ideas about the education of children and once wrote, "It may be that we become more learned through the knowledge of others. We become wise only through ourselves."

I found the child education section of the Wikipedia article about him fascinating, as it chimes so well with Unitarian thought. Here's what it says: 

"He believe that a tutor should be in dialogue with the student, letting the student speak first... such a dialogue was intended to create an environment in which students would teach themselves. They would be able to realize their mistakes and make corrections to them as necessary.

    Individualized learning was integral to his theory of child education. He argued that the student combines information already known with what is learned and forms a unique perspective on the newly learned information. Montaigne also thought that tutors should encourage the natural curiosity of students and allow them to question things. He postulated that successful students were those who were encouraged to question new information and study it for themselves, rather than simply accepting what they had heard from authorities on any given topic.... 

    Experience also was a key element to learning for Montaigne. Tutors needed to teach students through experience rather than through the mere memorization of information often practised in book learning. He argued that students would become passive adults, blindly obeying and lacking the ability to think on their own.... He believed that learning through experience was superior to learning through the use of books. For this reason, he encouraged tutors to education their students through practice, travel, and human interaction."

What is not to like about that? Montaigne was far ahead of his time. Even when I was a child, in the 1960s, much emphasis was placed on rote memorization of dates and facts, although we were also (thankfully) encouraged to find out things for ourselves. 

I'm also a great believer in lifelong learning. I hope to *never* stop learning new things, and believe with Montaigne that experience is absolutely the best teacher of wisdom. Although, I also think that the reading of books and the acquisition of new knowledge and ideas is vital too. I have written on here before about the huge impact which books and the new ideas they have brought me, have had on my life. 

In our Unitarian communities, we encourage our attenders and members to bring their whole selves to the process of "Living Unitarianly" to quote Unitarian minister, Michael Dadson. Which includes not only what we have previously learned (from whatever source) but also our life experiences. And asking questions, rather than blindly accepting what others tell us. And applying it all to our current lives. Unitarianism urges us to be open to new ideas, new ways of being in the world, so that we may change and grow into our wisest and best selves, respecting and supporting the life journeys of our fellow travellers along the way.

    

Why Reason is Important

When I first read this week's quote, by Austrian philosopher, Karl Popper, I was doubtful about it. It reads, "The do-gooders are the real enemies of an open society."

Luckily, it is my practice to try to discover the actual words of the quote, rather than depending on Google to translate them correctly from the German (although, to be fair, if often does a good job). And discovered that the quote comes from his book, The Open Society and Its Enemies, and that his argument is not a simple dismissal of the works of "do-gooders". 

Instead, he seems to be advocating the primacy of reason over emotion, to which, as a Unitarian, I have to give serious consideration. Here is another, somewhat longer quote, from the same book: "Aestheticism and radicalism must lead us to jettison reason, and to replace it by a desperate hope for political miracles. This irrational attitude which springs from intoxication with dreams of a beautiful world is what I call Romanticism. It may seek its heavenly city in the past or in the future; it may preach 'back to nature' or 'forward to a world of love and beauty'; but its appeal is always to our emotions rather than to reason. Even with the best intentions of making heaven on earth it only succeeds in making it a hell - that hell which man alone prepares for his fellow-men."

Hmm. I'm not sure I entirely agree with him - I believe there is room for hopes and dreams in our lives, otherwise what would be the point? Yet at the same time, I can reluctantly understand what he seems to be saying: that when those hopes and dreams are founded on emotions rather than reason, they may not have a very good chance of success. I believe we need a mixture of hopes and dreams with hard-headed reason and commonsense, if we are to move towards a better society for all of us.

It reminds me of the oft-misquoted words of Samuel Johnson, from 1775: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." What Johnson actually said, commenting on "the unhappy failure of pious resolves", was, "Sir, hell is paved with good intentions."

So perhaps our take-away from this should be not to rush into blindly "doing good" without a wider and reasoned consideration of all the possible consequences of our actions. Which may be a colder way to live, yet ultimately, it may do more good than the alternative.

Considering Death

The 18th century American polymath, writer and statesman, Benjamin Franklin famously wrote, "Nothing is certain except death and taxes." However, it is sometimes possible to be exempt from taxes, or to get a refund, but death is certain. Every living thing, including us, is mortal, and will one day, sooner or later, die.

Death is the final mystery; I blogged about this way back in 2011, here. More than twelve years later, my attitude to death remains the same. I believe we cannot know what happens after death, but we can choose to face it with courage or with fear and dread. And, being an optimist, I choose to face it with, if not courage, then at least with equanimity. As someone mutters at the beginning of a track of Pink Floyd's wonderful album Dark Side of the Moon, "I am not frightened of dying. Everyone's got to die sometime. Why should I be frightened of dying? There's no reason for it. Any time will do, I don't mind." I first heard that at the age of 13, and it had a profound effect on my attitude to death.

 (I hasten to add that I've had any bad health news, I've just been thinking about it lately - the fruits of getting older, I guess). 

When I carried out a survey of the beliefs, values and practices of contemporary British Unitarians, back in 2017 (the findings are published in Unitarians: Together in Diversity, published by the Lindsey Press) one of the questions I asked was, "What do you believe happens after we die?" And the responses were varied and fascinating: a significant minority of the respondents (19%) declared that they did not believe in life after death - that when the body dies, that's it. More than a third were open-minded about it, but were not sure what form, if any, it might take. Many of these were willing to consider such possibilities like the idea that human beings 'live on' in the memories of others; or that the soul / spirit lives on after death, perhaps as a return to God / the Source; or as life on a spiritual plane or some other form of consciousness; or in a reincarnated existence.

Many shared my own belief that it is far more important to concentrate on doing the best we can, where we are, in this life, rather than worrying overmuch over what might happen "afterwards". For me, living well is far more important. As a Unitarian, I am fortunate that I don't need to worry about where my soul might go after death, depending on my actions in this life: I believe in neither heaven nor hell as after-life concepts. As far as I'm concerned, we make our own hells, our own heavens, here and now. And, through our actions (or inactions), we can turn other people's lives into living hells, living heavens.

Yet I do believe that some part of me will be reunited with the Divine, from whence my soul came, when I was born. I find this belief comforting, and it even helps me to listen to the Divine spark within, so that I can strive to be the best person I can, here, now.

Choosing to Follow the Example of Jesus

I don’t know why it is, but most of the news we read in the papers, hear on the radio, see on the television or the internet, seems to be bad news. Decent behaviour seems less spectacular and is less often reported. Why is that, do you think? Could it be because we instinctively expect such behaviour, and therefore feel it unnecessary to call attention to it? I think that this would be more the Unitarian view of human nature. I believe it is our job to rise above our petty human limitations and find a better, more inclusive, more compassionate way of living in relationship with the rest of humankind, and with the blue-green planet that is our home.

(credit:RasooliArtowrks on DeviantArt)

I love the writings of Richard Rohr, a Catholic Franciscan monk, who is one of the most open-minded Christians I have ever known. He tells us, “Jesus never said, 'Worship me,'' he said 'Follow me.' He asks us to imitate him in his own journey of full incarnation. To do so, he gives us two great commandments: (1) Love God with your whole heart, soul, mind, and strength and (2) Love your neighbour as yourself. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus shows us that our 'neighbour' even in cludes our 'enemy'."

It is up to us to follow the example of Jesus, love our neighbours as ourselves, treat them as they would wish to be treated, with lots of compassion, no judgement, and absolute equity and respect, and do our best to make the world a more positive, happier place.

I have long believed that there is a divine spark within each of us, "that of God" as the Quakers would say. As I see it, our job as Unitarians, as human beings, is to be constantly aware of the divine influences around us, in the world, in our fellow human beings, and to recognise that there is that of God in everyone, and that we are all connected to each other, on a very fundamental level. When we are in loving relationship with others, we can form circles of love. Because being in loving relationship with others is the strongest way I know of influencing the world for good.

Which the world desperately needs at the moment. Although our headlines are filled with news of the war in Gaza (not so much about the Ukraine now, although the war there continues), there are many other places in the world where war and famine and hatred are spreading their toll of misery. Many other places which need our attention, our compassion, our action. We human beings are complex creatures. I think we have to accept that the polarity between what we call good and what we call evil is present in every individual, as well as in humankind generally, but that it is up to each one of us to make a conscious effort to choose the good over the evil, and to make of our lives a greater whole.

So what should we do about this? We are all human beings, we are all members of many communities – our families, our friends, our colleagues, our faith and other communities – and we are all members of the human race. What difference can we, as individuals, make to those communities? I think we need to be aware that we are in a living relationship with the rest of the world, and that our words and actions can influence the fate of that world and its inhabitants, our fellow human beings, not to mention all the other living things. Whether our influence is for good or ill is up to us.

There are people whose lives have been shining examples of putting this Golden Rule, which is shared by all the major religions, into practice. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr was one; Nelson Mandela was another; so was Mother Theresa. I could also mention the Dalai Lama and Archbishop Desmond Tutu. What all these people have in common is that whatever life threw at them, they somehow managed to rise above the natural human instincts for revenge and hate, and continued to live their lives in a spirit of love.

It’s a big wide world, and we are only little people. But we can resolve to make our little corners of the world more loving places.

 

Life's Ups and Downs

You know how it is... on any particular day, we can be strolling along in our lives, quite happy, with nothing in particular going on, then some news comes which turns everything upside down. It might be that something terrible has happened in the world - another war or natural disaster, or we are reminded that the climate change crisis is still getting worse, day by day, whether we ignore it or not, whether we do your best to minimise our own carbon footprint or not. The news is full of distressing stories.

Or it might be something more personal: a family member or close friend is ill, when yesterday they were fine; or something else has happened to them, which will change their life, and hence ours.

Or it might be something quite trivial that matters to nobody else but us: perhaps a coffee date is cancelled, or we realise we've screwed something up at work. But it still hurts or irritates us, upsetting our equilibrium.

In all these cases, what has happened is a life-changing event. But the only thing we can control, is our own response to whatever it is. And how we respond may change over quite a short period of time. Our first response will (probably) to be upset, hurt, angry, sad, ashamed - any one of a number of negative emotions. 

Yet I have found, over the years, that our first responses are rarely the most helpful ones, unless they inspire us to do something positive. (To give an example, if we are upset by a video about something bad happening in the world, and our response is to try to help in whatever way we can, that is helpful.)

But mostly, our first responses to something upsetting are negative, and not helpful in the long term. At such times, I find it useful (if I can) to step away from the bad news (whatever it is) and find somewhere I can be alone and simply breathe. Just breathe. If I'm at home, I'll take myself up into the Forest, and allow its peace to rebalance me. If I can manage to remember to do this, the tumult in my mind will eventually quieten, enabling me to consider the situation with a little more objectivity. Because I know, from long experience of responding first and considering later, that then, and only then, will I be able to respond appropriately, helpfully, compassionately, to whatever it is.

Of course, there are situations when this simply doesn't work - if we have lost a loved one, for example. But even then, simply sitting or walking in silence, meditating, for a while may give us the strength to cope with whatever the situation is, to find some perspective, and to remember that we are not alone. That we have family and friends to support us. And in my case, to remember that God is Love at the centre of everything. And that, as Julian of Norwich famously wrote, in the long term, "all shall be well, all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well."

A Huge Challenge

Mahatma Gandhi, the mid-20th century non-violent Indian nationalist and philosopher, who famously led the Indian nation out of the British Empire, once wrote, "To see the universal and all-pervading Spirit of truth face to face, one must be able to love the meanest of creation as oneself. And a man who aspires after that cannot afford to keep out of any field of life."

In other words, it's not good enough to stand at the sidelines of life and spout platitudes about goodness, mercy etc. It is necessary to engage with everything around us, on a deeply compassionate and empathic level, regardless of its / their station and circumstance. Gandhi was famous for engaging with people of the Dalit caste, those who were considered to be "untouchable" by members of higher castes.

But oh my goodness! It is a huge challenge. I am sitting here in my nice warm house, working on my laptop (because I can afford to use as much electricity as I need to) and generally living a life of privilege. I have written about my uneasiness about it before, and am only too aware that as a well-off, White, heterosexual woman, I have a head start on so many others, simply through accidents of birth, and good fortune.

Yet Gandhi is not talking only about having compassion and empathy for other human beings, vitally necessary though that is. He speaks of loving "the meanest of creation" as oneself. If we follow that to its logical end, we should all be vegans, climate change and social justice activists, and committed to non-violence, and to alleviating the circumstances of anyone worse off than ourselves.

And I fear that it too hard for most of us. It is too hard for me. Then I remember that I am in the privileged position of being able to choose whether or not to engage with this stuff. And feel guilty all over again. 

Yet I believe that the attempt to live in this way should at least be made, if we are to save this planet and the people and living creatures on it. If we are to fight for justice and equity for all living beings. Words are easy to say and write, but translating those words into concrete and effective actions is hard. Perhaps the least any of us should do is what we can, where we are. And be aware of what we are running away from facing, if we choose to turn our backs on making the effort, being our best selves.

Like I said, it's a huge challenge...