The power source of the universe: science and spirituality

Citation

Wynne-Brown, K. (2003), "The power source of the universe: science and spirituality", European Business Review, Vol. 15 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr.2003.05415aab.005

The power source of the universe: science and spirituality

Kenneth Wynne-Brown

Kenneth Wynne-Brown is a retired Engineer.

Keywords: Religion, Politics, Confucianism

Abstract The relationship between religion and secular politics has been one of creative tension at best, but often one of conflict and double standards. It has become fashionable, in recent decades especially, to blame religion for conflicts created by politics and economics. Kenneth Wynne-Brown looks beneath the surface to find in the world's great religions and their teachers a common thread. True religion, he argues, holds temporal power in check by measuring it against a greater and more ancient wisdom.

Groups or societies can be incipiently dangerous because from them can spring the requirements demanded by the organisation itself, its power, its personnel structure, its dogma and financial needs. History shows that religions, for instance, tend always to end up with the movement and its officers taking priority over the original ideas which they were supposed to spread. Moreover those ideas or teachings seem to get submerged under an immovable load of precepts and interpretations as to be almost unrecognisable as the simple truths they once were.

The ultimate responsibility for any pleasant or unpleasant society must devolve upon the ethos of its individuals. George Bernard Shaw made the point succinctly when he said of Socialism: "Unfortunately the world isn't yet ready for it and when it is it won't be necessary"! Unfortunately the individual has little or no say in the governance of the church to which he or she may belong, whilst the spreading of goodness, which one would have thought was one of religion's prime objectives, is strange in that one of its most apparent abilities is to divide the peoples of the world.

It is even more strange that in most of the world's great religions there is, contrariwise, a central core of belief in one God. Islam with Allah and Judaism with Jehovah, are both monotheistic. Christianity could be classed, in spite of a trinity, as monotheistic with a devolvement of grace from God the Father with His mantle of Christ upon Jesus and His Holy Spirit penetrating our beings.

Surely these are one and the same Almighty, personified according to the concepts of each race and its cultural requirements; all being enhanced by mysteries deepened with diverse rituals administered only by those ordained within the particular man made hierarchies. The tragedy is that the basic wonderful simplicity of an individual's understanding that there may be a universal spirit or God permeating his or her self and all of life is obscured almost totally.

Even Buddha, who would never acknowledge that there is a God, taught of a state of Nirvana, a kind of total spiritual freedom attainable by those willing to tread the path to understanding. It has been suggested that his denial of a God was to prevent those meditating from being disturbed by unnecessary subjective visions of such a being. Nevertheless Nirvana seems to bear a close resemblance to The Kingdom of God within oneself, the esoteric message for the finding of which is contained behind many of Christ's parables. (See A New Man by Maurice Nicoll, BA, MB, BChir, MRCS, LRCP, Robinson & Watkins, London.)

Hinduism also has an esoteric philosophy in that the attainable state of Nirvana by the practice of the Yoga path is accepted generally. Again this points to a kind of central spirituality pervading the many superficial diversions encrusting Hinduism. What all this probably indicates is that the great religions have a way to find some mystical creation or state of mind which cannot be described but yet must be and permeate all of life and existence; the one God. The prophets and leaders who may have experienced similar states to Nirvana would not have had adequate language for descriptions of such wondrous experiences. What they passed on would have been subjective enlightenments with probable variations in the resulting faiths that grew from them. The more's the pity as it does not seem likely that any ecumenical development can possibly come about for a very long time: particularly between East and West unless some new attitudes towards basic commonalities are investigated and discussed openly. For example:

• •

  Most believe in prayer or its mind effect.

• •

  All have some belief in an after life or spiritual continuity of some kind.

• •

  All have some belief in an all-pervading God or the reaching of a state of mind akin to the effect of finding God or total knowledge and enlightenment.

It would seem that the real divisions are semantics, ritual, chauvinism, the power structure and a resulting desire for a larger share of the world's flocks, not to mention avarice. One could say, unfortunately, that most of the political and spiritual departments designated for the governance of mankind could be heard to say in a way: to hell with them! Not because of any ill will between them and us but because they have not realised that all lasting improvements must generate from the bottom up. The rock on which the house was to be built, as was said. The fact was forgotten that the real lasting power is mostly maintained by the individual units comprising a society.

Going back to around 500 BC, Confucius, by teaching that the behaviour of the individual should be such that there was an automatic response to a traditional pattern of courtesy and consideration, showed that a whole nation could be changed. He noted that primitive peoples and tribal customs required that certain things were done or not done and that such knowledge was so ingrained as to be traditional. He then set about teachings which would reintroduce the traditions of good behaviour which changed the nation and lasted for over 2000 years. It can be done. It was done and it was achieved without any of our modern penetrating media. It was taught through the parents and those who governed. It was said by Confucius that: only those are fit to govern who would rather be excused. He believed that the people, as a source of a society's well being, were like grass as to wind and would bend to the ideas and guidance of those in charge so long as they were honest and trustworthy. If the leaders were honest and well meaning, so would the people be. This was the medium and Confucius's teachings of correct behaviour and wisdom were spread throughout China, which comprised, finally, nearly a third of the world's population.

At this point, one's mind may begin to wander towards comparisons and question how, for instance, in the first place a British MP gets there? Just which of our representatives were picked for being wise, honourable, trustworthy, etc., let alone would rather be excused? We seem to have only the option of choosing from those who put themselves up for selection in the first place! And what about the appointment of clerics and teachers by whom our own and future generations are guided and moulded? The man in the street or anyone else has little say about their character, suitability for their jobs or their wisdom.

It is a sad thing to be forced to say but our society appears to be disintegrating. We no longer have widespread viable traditions of honesty and honour. Our system of law is now so complicated and extortionately expensive that any uncaring powerful group or the very rich can and do ride roughshod over those who cannot afford to fight through the courts for what is the justice due to them. An ideal society would just not tolerate such a state of affairs because the individuals comprising the public would react positively. For example there was a case in Norway, long ago, when a journal made such a feast of an intimate personal scandal that so many of the readers stopped subscribing and it went out of business. Here the press write leaders regretting what they have printed but claim it was their public duty.

There are so many possible causes for the start of the decline that it is unnecessary to name them. They do nearly all, however, come right back to the limits, which the individual should not tolerate in his or her own behaviour. It took Confucianism generations to educate an automatic system of traditional good behaviour into the populace but it was achieved and it was highly successful. Perhaps we could make a small start by negating the modern seductive custom of, if I don't somebody else will! This is probably one of the most corrosive attitudes known to mankind and Christ was obviously aware of it when he said: "Do unto others as you would they do unto you".

Today there is blowing in the western world a contrary wind of change which seems to be almost a concerted and deliberate attack upon every traditional custom of good manners, behaviour, fair dealing, courtesy, respect for the law and general consideration for others. Greed, selfishness and violence are almost taken for granted. These cannot be cured by law enforcement alone and it is to be hoped that the state will not be reached when even the criminals will not relish the society they themselves have created. Civilisations have risen and fallen in past history in a repetitive manner but they have not, as far as is known, had generally the idea that each individual has the power within himself or herself to avert such crises of degradation. The collective will of many people resulting from each deciding to conduct his or her life in a decent and pleasant manner could produce miracles.

This is our society on our speck of a planet in the vastness of the universe. We have the freedom as individuals in the spiritual system, wherever or whomever we may be, to influence the ethos of that society. It is one hell of a responsibility and time is accelerating!