torstai 14. kesäkuuta 2012

Is my conscience really mine?



It is often said that conscience is a voice of god, or at least a universal voice which is loudly or quietly whispering the right kind of advice and warnings that no outsider can experience. But what is the origin of that voice, or most often thoughts that come up without invitation to interfere one’s behavior? Is it an inborn quality in all people, or just a result of upbringing and education within a certain environment? Also are these inner messages always right?
By looking at the behavior of people in a districted environment we could make a conclusion that there are really some common patterns in people’s ways of thinking: what they for example consider as good or bad. So, we could take that as a token of universal, even divine quality in human beings. But it is easy to see that the ways of thinking differ much among nations. Furthermore, the ways tend to change in time even in a community, so we have a reason to drop divinity with its unchangeable qualities aside. 
Now, if the conscience is but a result of culture: why is its role often emphasized in religious life? Is the role of religion merely to stand by the common behavioral patterns of a community? Unfortunately the situation sometimes looks like that, because strict religious rules have proved to be excellent tools for rulers – whether spiritual or secular. In combining religious and secular administration it is necessary to effect on people’s ways of thinking. 
The most useful tool is to claim that a certain pattern comes directly from god. If somebody has courage to propose counter-arguments they are ruled over with Holy Scriptures. Very few people dare to stand against that sort of evidence by claiming that all written texts have certainly come forth through human brains and hands, clean or dirty – who can judge and tell us for sure?
This is by no means to be understood as a request to throw away all scriptures and religious and social rules based or not based on them, but to think carefully about all the ideas that are given us as ultimate truths, and even rethink all one’s own thoughts about things that are vital in understanding the meaning and function of life in general. 
We might find out that many ideas aim just at social stability, they are a result of practical experience in human communities. Such regulations can make social life more stable and safe; they give some predictability which is important both for politicians as well as for common people.
It is also seen that there are individuals who in their thinking and ideas differ very much from ordinary ways although they have probably in their youth been given the same values as the majority. These people are often considered as apostates or troublemakers who are not willing to accept necessary boundaries. Others may say that they have got a weak and unsettled conscience that they ignore or silence if it causes trouble or inconvenience. Of course this is the case among many criminals – their mind is unable or unwilling to adapt to social standards. But in time they will certainly learn by doing, by bearing all the consequences of their doings.
But not all renegades stand below the common moral and ethical rules. There are also some people whose conscience and even consciousness lies far beyond the average. They seem to know for sure which part of common rules are but human inventions with very little value to the development and evolution of mankind and its single individuals.
Somehow a conscience is like all other human skills – it develops in practice. Some of you might say that this is not the case – it becomes worse if a person conceives a multitude of means to ignore it. Exceptions confirm the rule, in most cases the conscience of an adult tells much more than that of a child. 
But how is it that some little children seem to be very sensitive in moral affairs before they really have come in touch to their social environment? Have they inherited their qualities from their parents? We know that sometimes talented parents have talented children, but that cannot be taken as a law even in common skills, not to talk about innermost qualities.
It is very hard to determine what qualities a human being brings along in birth. Some scholars say that a child is a tabula rasa, an empty table, on which life writes its whole story. But this kind of theory does not stand even in the light of common human experience. People are different even at the beginning of their journey. 
Some people might claim that god himself makes us all different. We know very well that every single snowflake is different – why not every one of us humans? But is this the final truth, or is there a secret resource of ripened experience hidden in some unseen layers of human consciousness? The answer here depends upon what kind of period we understand the human life to consist of – of just a short run of few decades or of a much further period: starting from a living soul and ending up as a life-giving spirit, as St. Paul once wrote!
In conclusion we could say that a conscience seems to be a mixture of inborn, learnt and individually developed qualities which very seldom can be defined and testified as ultimate truths. Anyway they serve as useful means of guidance and help to maintain a peace of mind in relation to the community or to oneself.
In most cases the conscience blames and accuses us for breaking the common rules of our community, especially those that are defined as divine. In these cases, it often cries out very loud for somehow it certainly is the voice of masses.
Very seldom it reminds us of all forms of mental uncleanliness and selfish ideas that we are not even going to realize. This sort of highly sophisticated conscience is evidently presented in the so called Sermon on the Mount. It depicts a mind where any sort of unclean ideas are impossible to arise. It is not a question of self-discipline anymore, but a firm state due to a very long process – “a restricted way that leads to life” – if we once again choose to use a biblical expression.
Some of us might think how a person can be led from life to life? The biblical message evidently talks about the kind change in one’s consciousness that leads to an everlasting unbreakable knowledge of one’s ultimate spiritual being which has a clear and sound continuance even after one’s physical death. This kind of consciousness must of course stand above all those things that are dependent on dissolving layers of a human being such as physical body and lower mental activities: common automatic feelings and everyday thinking.
You might say that it is not possible for a human being to exceed one’s feelings and thinking without totally losing one’s mental health. But think again! Maybe a human being is just a bridge which must sooner or later be crossed over – into a far more brilliant way of consciousness and conscience that never again fails for it has found the roots and essence of all. Until then, let us gently watch our conscience so that it brings or shouts us not just the obvious fixed ideas based on our culture but also gives an intuition or a whisper of some deeper knowledge that is to be searched and found from the innermost layers of our soul.





keskiviikko 13. kesäkuuta 2012

Whoever seeks to save his life loses it, but whoever loses his life preserves it.



Nearly always there are some kind of filters between perception and observation. These factors tend to modify and even distort the original mental image. The set of filters gathered in a person could well be called his self-image. These are compounded of a mixture of feelings, thoughts and recollections, which instantly and automatically place themselves between perception and observation.
For the most part these self-images are developed in childhood by observing and imitating the behavior of one’s environment, especially that of one’s own parents. The images are affected by all the remarks that one has to face, “for strong is the power of thanks and reproach”, as Nietzsche wrote in his Zarathustra.
Soon there are fears and hopes in the mind of a child, that gain some extra coloring from defense mechanisms: aggression and denial etc. In time a person begins to identify himself with a varying combination of all these factors.
Maintaining and strengthening this self-image or ego becomes a continuing inner and outer process, which could well be called a mission in life. One must by all means gain approval for it both from oneself and from other people as well.
Very often people choose their friends according to their ability to maintain and nourish their egos. The most common mode for interaction might be defined as: I shall praise you if you in turn will praise me.
The internal process contains usually more falsehood than that which comes from other people. It is quite easy to be a little insincere in explaining things in one’s own favor. Some people use reverse means by taking the position of the victim, but that is just a peculiar way to overcome a crisis of self-image.
What is wrong in this? Nothing, it is just a normal temporal state of the human mind. It is the most common result of human culture with both harmful and beneficial effects. This tendency of mind keeps the consciousness restless and in continuous movement, so that it must grow in one direction or another.
One day a human gets tired of everlasting changes in his mind and begins to search for an exit from this vicious circle. In a common case, a person ends up with the conflict of two beings within himself: in the depths of his mind there is a silent knowledge of peace and understanding behind ever changing thoughts and feelings.
There will be a premonition of a different kind of self, which in facing life does not need any old patterns and images as masks. Everything in this new state of consciousness seems much clearer and simpler than earlier, and the inner views can easily be opened and unwrapped into thoughts that are needed. There is no need to seek grounds for them from former experiences.
Bringing forth the inner self is not usually a short event but a long process, the speed of which depends on how soon a person is willing and able to dissolve most of the mental bonds to temporal things in life. This will by no means be an easy job to do for an old and familiar prison is often safer than a strange way of freedom. Gradually also the subconscious content of the mind tends to catch up. There is no reason to be afraid, for it is just ‘one’s own phantoms that are haunting’.
How can we contribute to our inner process? Just by watching carefully and in peace, for forcing oneself to a certain mode causes nothing but falsehood and despair. It is often said that one has to learn to love oneself before one can really love one’s neighbor. This does not mean any kind of selfishness, but a sound acceptance of oneself, which leads to an honest view of oneself. A fierce fight with one’s own mind seldom leads to permanent results, for the human mind is much more devious and complex than we can imagine. 
It is best to watch how our images or views of ourselves come up and see them as pure complex compilations of thoughts, feelings and recollections, and let them pass away. Some day we may think, as St. Paul did, that I am strong when I am weak: so that my real inner being is rising forth and becoming an active factor as soon as my personal masks are removed.