Does “Faith” Freak You Out?

Perhaps, I lost you at the word.  Faith.

Originally, “faith” had nothing to do with “religion”. 

See also:

Strong belief.  Loyalty.  Acceptance.  Constancy.  Truth.  Trust in someone or something.  Allegiance to duty or person.  Fidelity to promises.  Sincerity of intentions.  Strong conviction.  Confidence in a person or thing. 

Strong, weighty word.  Redefined through history and encumbered with a load that it did nothing to deserve.

My feeling is...what a loss.

The word has been translated by the very language that created it. 

With some, the fear of the word is palpable.

Mindfulness is about clarity.  Removing judgment. 

Science needs clarity to practice science.  Science, itself, will be greater when we clear our heads (our thoughts), bring awareness to our language (word), and follow through with unbiased action (experimentation).  When we perceive threats, in a spoken word, we elicit a fight or flight response.  We function from our primitive brain.  We react.

People have had “faith” in placebos.

Faith existed long before religion.

The English Language lost a weighty word to its “evolved” meaning.

I want to start a movement.  Save “faith”.  In fact, “keep the faith”.  Fear leads to paranoia and so much more. 

Let’s get mindful with our words.  We have enough judgment leading to dissension.  I’d like to kidnap “faith” back from the battle zone of religion (more on that at another time).

Will you join me in a “leap of faith”...an “act of faith”?

Maybe, what we really need to change is judgment and fear?  What are we afraid of?

Used as it was originally prescribed, faith sure sounds like a source of peace and tranquility.

When Success Became Failure

But look toward the sky?

A curious thing happened one day when we weren't looking.  Our confidence did a flip-flop.  The meaning of a simple phrase changed.  Completely.

"I KNEW it!"

That's the phrase.

Maybe you remember being in 1st or 2nd grade.  You, or another bold classmate, raised a hand.  "Ooo.  Oooo.  Oooooo.  I know!  I know!  Pick me!"

The teacher glanced over and said, "Joe?  Yes?"  You answered with assurance.  Her pitch became higher and pleasant, "Yes!   Good job!"

She looked down at the textbook to move on, a hush fell over the room for just a moment, and you responded one more time even louder, "I KNEW it"!

Then, one day, all that changed.

Maybe it was life.  Maybe time hardens us.  Maybe time disappoints us.  Maybe time proves that we may be wrong sometimes.

Maybe time makes us wiser...and maybe, it doesn't.

We begin wanting to deliver that "right" answer more than anything.  We want to be right so badly that the day we were wrong, or the day we watched someone else give the wrong answer, the world of right changed.  Success changed.  Maybe it was that first twinge of hearing, "try again", "get-ting warmerrrrrr???", or the dreaded moving on...from a nod to Joe to a turn to Sarah.  "Do you know the answer, Sarah?"

Whoa.  That was rough.

Perhaps, we became cynics.  Disenchanted with our possibilities.  Perhaps, our dream of playing for the New Orleans Saints didn't come to fruition or that the audition for The Voice was just not in the cards.  Perhaps, it's just safer to know that we WILL be wrong and be "prepared for defeat" as a well-adjusted grown-up.  After all, if Joe were a Boy Scout, being prepared doesn't only mean knowing how to make Boston Baked Beans over an open fire.  Being prepared, in and of itself, often has pretty grim, pessimistic connotations.

BUT...one thing did remain the same.  We wanted to be "right".

So...when we grew up, "I KNEW it" almost always meant failure.  After all, we may be wrong, but we didn't want to lose being right.

If we want to be successful, change the world, chase dreams, be a positive force, and make anything and everything possible, I believe we need to put "I KNEW it" in front of a mirror.  Pull out her old reflection and stick with THAT.

We need to stop proving our selves "right" when we fail and start a movement of "I KNEW it" meaning I can make a difference.  I can bring positive change to my surroundings.

Maybe harness our "inner child" of promise, excitement, creativity....and definitely, enthusiasm?

"The Ripple Starts Here".

We need to ask who is the genius?  I'm thinking it was Joe.  Confident, brave and a little bit brazen too.

Sometimes, I hear our 1st grade teacher saying, "Yes.  Joe.  You certainly do know!?"  Failure after each miserable failure.  "Your ARE right.  You're wrong again."  Awesome. 

Drop the world-weary psyche-out of adulthood.  Abandon the journey to failure.  Stop blindly traipsing along on the "mature" stepping stones of "I KNEW it.  I KNEW it.  I KNEW it". 
Yes.   You're right again.  Success!   You failed.  They failed.  The world fails.  Sounds like insanity to me?

What are we teaching our kids?  Maybe it's time for us to learn from them?

Then, you KNEW it.  Now, you don't.

Do you wanna be right?  Or...wrong?  Surprise yourself!  Whodda thunk being wrong could feel so right?

Prejudice? Read the label...

It SAYS "Chunky", but buyer beware?

Chunky or creamy?  Which one are you?  Maybe, you can swing either way?

Me?  I'm a chunky.  Or...no peanut butter at all, thank you.  Ya.  Pretty uptight and inflexible, I know. I guess we all have our "things".

I've been thinking a lot about judgment lately, and then, this peanut butter dropped into my shopping basket.  All of the sayings and deep thoughts came to mind.   "Judging a book by its cover", "leaping to conclusions", "buyer beware", "not getting what you pay for", "buying what you're selling me"...and, ultimately, prejudice and first impressions fused together in my now, favorite jar of all time.  Here she is!  Chunky Peanut Spread?

I ask...do YOU see a single, precious nut chunk in there?  

Me?  I didn't see a one.  My son (a chunky young man himself -- very thin, but a Chunky Man) was much more inquisitive and open-minded.  He looked very closely and gave an additional test.  He raised the jar to his NOSE, and he smelled the peanut butter.  As a peanut butter connoisseur, and he is (well-initiated to the nuances of good peanut butter I may add), he said, "this is DEFINITELY chunky". Whoa.  Texture is not everything!

We have a split home.  Three chunky.  Three creamy.  So, this was easy.  We grabbed a "creamy jar" to compare.  We unscrewed the creamy and sure enough he was right!  Even without the chunks, chunky and creamy SMELL vastly different!!

You can read the label and feel deceived.  Duped.  Short-changed.  Maybe you even feel like the victim of a terrible lie.  Betrayed.  You can return to the store and insist on a replacement.  "Chunky!  I bought Chunky!"  You can write the company a note and hope for a crate of pure, unadulterated Chunky Spread in return for their negligence.  Shoot.  You could call a lawyer.  

Me?  Somehow, I loved this crazy jar.  If it was possible, I would have kept this jar forever.  A piece of art.  I'd call it "People Butter" and rest it in a very special spot.

The outside may lead to a certain determination or hasty conclusion, but remember it's all about what's INside.  And, even upon closer inspection,  peering into the "jar of People Butter", there may be some truth to what the label said all along.

For me, one thing IS for sure.  When I see Chunky Peanut Butter Spread...when I "buy what you're selling"...when you're advertising "chunky" all over?  

You better have the nuts.

Where's the PC in Peace and Compassion?

His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama Meets with Thai Buddhist Scholars

I'm struck by the notion that there is a "political correctness" attached to peace and compassion.  When, in fact, peace and/or compassion is "right".

In 2012, Californians voted to uphold the death penalty.  In 2012, the world witnessed war, upheaval, and atrocities at every corner of the earth.  In 2012, we continue to determine when "an eye for an eye" is justified.

My questions remain.  When are peace and compassion universal truths and not just words to use at this time of year or words to invoke during a healthy meditation exercise?

When are retaliation and punishment "acceptable"?  Do peace and compassion begin with the individual and ripple out to our family, neighbors, nation, and world?  Do the rules change for a nation under siege?  Do numbers of lives lost constitute a repeal of a compassionate response?

Is war different from a single slaying?  Is the children's song, "Let Peace Begin with Me", a hope, dream, fairytale?

We seem to assign an appropriateness to morality.  We seem to decide when it is OK to "show mercy" and when we can stray from that ideal.  Does this judgment and determination defeat the entire concept of peace and compassion?  Is a compassionate life conditional?  Are we capable of deciding when it is OK to wish ill upon another?  How many people have to arrive at a conclusion to make an exception to our moral code?  When is the consequence "it's all right to take a life under these circumstances" acceptable?

Does the anonymity of a group vote make a difference?  Are we safer casting our judgment and punishment when we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with fellow executioners? Do we dilute our personal responsibility and personal cognitive dissonance?

It is not always politically correct to say that peace and compassion should be exercised in some personal and global situations.  It will not win you a popularity contest.

In an article on this site, we discuss the notion of refraining from voicing opinions about issues or situations of which we know nothing.  But, we all do that.  Our jury system counts on that.  We are specifically removed from cases in which we DO have personal or business experience that may impact the case.  In fact, the more we know and experience, the less we are wanted on a jury.  Biased with first-hand knowledge and experience.

I've been called to jury duty again.  I get called to serve every year without fail.  If you believe in the concept that we bring about events in life that we dread or fear, time and time again, until we deal with our issues, I am an example for you.  Judgment.  A concept that I dread delivering when I am not the individual impacted by the horribly painful deeds of a perpetrator.  Most recently, following the Sandy Hook Elementary shootings, we saw Robbie Parker, father of 6-year-old Emilie Parker, express compassion in a situation requiring supernatural fortitude.

I have lived, forever grateful, that there are laws and law enforcers in the world.  I am extremely grateful that we have willing jurors who actively participate in our system as well as the "couch critics" who are steadfast and confident in their own determination of meting out punishment.  I get hung up in the details.  I get tied up in the contradictions.  And...I feel "who am I to say" what punishment fits the crime.  The victim may be sitting across from me in the courtroom or in another country.  I'm being asked to give my opinion in something I know nothing about and worse than that...I'm not the one in agony.

It would be easy for me to crusade in the name of peace and compassion.  It would be easy for me to dole out righteous punishment.  Neither would give me peace.

How many wars are fought in the name of peace and compassion?

Even the youngest of all have a sense of what is "right".  Even the weakest and meekest know peace, compassion, fairness, and goodness when they see it.  No matter how rudimentary their understanding may be.

In The Moral Life of Babies, Professor of Psychology, Paul Bloom of Yale University, discusses his research.

Morality... is a synthesis of the biological and the cultural, of the unlearned, the discovered and the invented. Babies possess certain moral foundations — the capacity and willingness to judge the actions of others, some sense of justice, gut responses to altruism and nastiness. Regardless of how smart we are, if we didn’t start with this basic apparatus, we would be nothing more than amoral agents, ruthlessly driven to pursue our self-interest.

Babies have an understanding of morality and we can be grateful for that.  In our  "adult wisdom", we understand when morals are conditional?  Is maturity knowing when compassion and kindness are no longer appropriate?

When legal and/or political "paperwork" is in order, are we "free and covered" to proceed without honoring our code for a compassionate response?  With the proper documentation, our transgressions from the natural, biological, innate moral code can be usurped.  Our "grown-up, "mature" cultural moral code includes a clause to dismiss ethics and compassion for all?  When is "do unto others" dismissed and retribution the "right" course of action?

Do peace and compassion "begin with me"?  I like to believe so.

I like to believe we are all active participants in the "ripple".  But, when circumstances change, when there are numerous victims involved, when countries are threatened, are we all Charlie Brown?  Is our moral code essentially Lucy's football?

Contracts and declarations cover our departure from the moral code?

If we speak of peace and compassion on a global scale... our voice may not only be ignored, but likely censored if it is determined that the "unrest" that "peace talk" may bring will put lives at stake.  No small irony.  Sometimes, "peace and compassion talk" can be the greatest threat of all.

Journalism, in particular, has always courageously treaded in this territory.  Journalists hear the not-too-subtle message from powers that be, "Hush.  We have our 'reasons' to depart from (ethical conduct) here".  Of course, ethical conduct gets redefined.  Truth and fairness get redefined.  Retaliation and retribution may now BE ethical.  Suddenly, what is in the "public interest" and what will save lives (peace and compassion) is no longer the answer.  Fundamental TRUTH itself has changed.  Reality changes.  Peace and compassion are not PC.

Many single, courageous voices in history have proven the dangers of peace and compassion.  In fact, peace and compassion may be the most dangerous and fearless position of all.

Those who walk the walk, and talk the talk, following these standards and codes are the most steadfast of all.  In fact, with no weapon and no retribution, those who live lives of complete peace and compassion hold the greatest power and make the greatest lasting changes we all enjoy long after their often-too-soon departure.

Often, they give their lives staying true to what is good, right, peaceful, and compassionate.  Staying true to our nature.  With or without realizing it, they remain the greatest threat.  Their weapon.  Peace and compassion.  Perhaps more feared than any automatic weapon or drone strike.  If they speak about peace and compassion, they are not PC.  Perhaps, most unfortunate of all, they are completely misunderstood.  They are not heard to be speaking out for saving the lives of ALL of those in harm's way.

To those who don't understand the deepest meaning of peace and compassion, peace and compassion in certain instances, under certain conditions, is just not PC.  At some point, I think most of us fall into that category.  Most of us can only aspire to become more like Robbie Parker, father of Emilie.

But, peace and compassion is for all.  Peace and compassion is for those fighting in the name of peace and compassion.  Peace and compassion needs to come out from the closet and be spoken about in ALL circumstances.  

We are only human.  But, we have people speaking and living with higher ideals.  Higher moral codes are possible.  Are we using excuses?  Reasons?  Is there an excuse to stray from what is "right"?

We knew what was fair and right from the beginning.  As babies, we had a moral compass.  What are we so afraid of now?

Freedom is at stake.  Are we "free" at all when we react against our morals and ethics and lose ourselves to something we know to be wrong in the first place?  Are we prisoners and victims for the offenders?  Controlled by their deeds?  Or, are we pioneers and free to act true to ourselves?  As is true in so much of life...we may need to look to the children.

Quotes and Photographs

Contributions by Friends of Davana Design

Humanitarians Work in Regions of Conflict

Humanitarians often work in regions
of conflict while risking their own lives

It is not surprising that people react with hatred toward those who humiliate them, control their movement, or deny their rights. There is nothing theoretically interesting in the individual or collective experience of anger and hate as a reaction to power that imposes helplessness on us or denies our very being. This is hatred as a response to power.  (Aljazeera.com)

Human rights, oppression, politics...and psychoanalysis?  In this Season of Giving, Gratitude, and Peace, Niza Yanay discusses the psychology of hatred as being the repression of love, denial of attachment, and fears of dependence that may play a role in political relations. She considers the "enemy" as the "forever lost friend" and peace as possible.  What do you think?  Can such volatile relations lead to positive change if we embrace a new understanding of peace, love, and "the other" as "one of us"?  Do the answers lie with humanitarians who risk their lives each day living with a collective respect for peace and the health of all of humanity -- while celebrating diversity?