Peace between people

(Originally posted on Thursday, 28 February 2019)

Therefore, the Sage embraces the One,
And becomes a Pattern to all under Heaven.
He does not make a show of himself,
Hence he shines;
Does not justify himself,
Hence he becomes known;
Does not boast of his ability,
Hence he gets his credit;
Does not brandish his success,
Hence he endures;
Does not compete with anyone,
Hence no one can compete with him.

I am obsessed about peace between people, especially about peace between religions, so the quote above is perfect to me. There is no room for fanaticism and there is no room for violence.

One of the most important people who advocated for the respect and peace between religions was John Paul II and I must admit that the longer I live the more I think he was a truly unique person. Of course he was criticized by some of the Catholics for some of his symbolic gestures, but a person who is truly religious should understand his intentions easily.

I am currently reading the Old Testament and the New Testament, but in the meantime I had also read a little Quran. I am fascinated by some other religions, especially by Hinduism and their ancient texts called Vedas and Upanishads. I am honestly intrigued by the ideas of karma and reincarnation that are found both in Hinduism and Buddhism. I find it extremely interesting that some wise Greek philosophers like Pythagoras, Socrates and Plato believed in reincarnation too. I also like to read about ancient Egyptian beliefs and about the beliefs of the indigenous peoples of the Americas. My most recent “discovery” is the ancient Chinese text Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing) that is the base for Taoism (both philosophical and religious Taoism). The quote at the start of this post comes from this text (translation by John C. H. Wu, chapter 22).

I must point out that I realise that a holy text can be properly understood only by the people who are familiar with it for a long time. For example I am a Christian (Latin/Roman Catholic), but when I started to read the Old Testament (which is kind of “valid” also in my religion) I was really disturbed by some fragments that I haven’t heard before. The Old Testament is so long that during a three-year liturgical cycle only around 5.7 % of the Old Testament is read (and explained) in the Catholic Church. Because I hadn't been familiar with most of the Old Testament before I don't judge it at all.

The problem of unfamiliarity with a holy text is by definition a very big problem and we should constantly remind ourselves about it. For example I tried to read the Quran, just out of curiosity, but its type of narration to me was kind of strange and/or lacking context, so the Quran itself seemed unclear. I don’t think that the problem was about translation because I used three different translations to two different languages. One of the translations was even described as “clear Quran”, but it was still not really clear to me. Please notice that I did find the correct chronological order of the Quran, but the particular parts of the Quran still are as they are. I am sure that Muslims who study the Quran for a long time don’t have this kind of problem and are able to read it relatively quickly, but to me it was too big of a problem and I was not able to continue reading it. But because I didn't read it in whole AND I hadn't been familiar with it before I don't judge it at all.

There is only one God, by definition. For every person and for every religion. I believe in God who loves all good people, not only good people from a particular religion. Yes, different religions “define” God in different ways, but at the same time they point out that we can't really understand the true nature of God. In EVERY religion there are people who seem to blessed and who are universally seen as “living saints”. Unfortunately in every religion there are also people who are fanatics. The number of fanatics and their inclination to violence is different in every religion, but it only really means that some religions can be used for political goals more easily than others. Nothing more.

In every holy book there are many good things to be found, but there are also parts that are more or less “disturbing”. Such parts are often used by some people to create anger of the fanatics. I don’t like it. People should concentrate on the things that they have in common, not on the things that are different, mostly because of the problem of unfamiliarity with a text described above.

Fanatics (all kinds of them, including religious fanatics and atheistic fanatics) try to convince everybody that only their opinion is right, pissing off everybody who has a different opinion. I don’t want to be such a person, so I am not afraid to say that I believe that any person can be “worthy of Heavens”.

Yes, I think that also atheists can be “worthy of Heavens”, as long as they are good to other people. It means, among other things, that atheists shouldn’t be intolerant towards religious people. The same goes to other way round – religious people shouldn’t be intolerant towards atheists.

Obviously the key word is “intolerant”. Tolerance is NOT about agreeing with everybody, but it’s about tolerating what and/or who you don’t agree with. Every person should be free to say what he thinks or to make his own decisions as long as he (or she) doesn’t hurt anybody else. Of course I don’t have anything against non-religious legal punishments, because every society needs protection from crimes. On the other hand imposing PURELY religious laws on atheists or people of different religions is not tolerant at all.

Tolerance is also NOT about setting some quotas for the minorities (both religious and non-religious types of minorities) because any quotas are by definition unfair to people from the majorities. Tolerance should never result in unfairness in any way. In fact unfairness defines intolerance – if people from the minorities are treated unfair then there is intolerance towards them. But if people from the majorities are treated unfair then there is intolerance towards them too. Yes, there can be intolerance towards people from the majorities! It actually is more and more common in our stupid “modern” world – for example in some sports women are FORCED to compete against men who “feel like women”. Ridiculous! I must say it again: Tolerance should NEVER result in unfairness in ANY way.

Some misguided opinions about tolerance are based on misguided opinions about unfairness. For example, is it unfair that two men can't have a baby together? Or is in unfair that two women can't have a baby together? No, it is NOT unfair. It's life. It's nature. This is why such pairs should not be allowed to adopt children. Not a single person should be treated unfair in the name of tolerance, including a little child who is about to be adopted. Such a child was born out of a man and a woman and ONLY such pairs should be allowed to adopt children. It's fair for children and NOT unfair towards anybody else. It's the natural way of life!

Life has a habit of not being fair. (...) A man who goes through life complaining about fairness will make nothing of himself.

The quote above (that can be found also in my post under the date of 20 April 2016) should make us all realise that some things will always be or seem to be unfair because life is as it is. The point is not to allow any unfairness towards us (real or imagined unfairness) make us fanatics.

(The sage) does not compete with anyone, hence no one can compete with him.