The
Development of The Numinous Way and Other Questions
Q: Can you explain something about
what
led you to develope The Numinous Way?
A: It arose from my diverse experience, my involvement with and study
of
various Ways, various religions and various philosophies. I found the
answers that they gave to be unsatisfactory in one or many ways, so I
began to think deeply about these questions and arrived at certain
conclusions: my own answers. It is these answers - the
result of over thirty five years of study and practical involvement -
that developed into The Numinous Way, or as I first called it, the Way
of Folk Culture.
Thus, my own thinking has evolved slowly as a direct result of my
practical experience of, my knowledge of, my study of, these various
religions and Ways - such as Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, paganism,
Christianity.
Q: Can you give some examples of
these
unanswered questions?
A: In respect of nearly all of them, I have never found a satisfactory
answer to the question, to the reality, of the diversity of cultures
and their homelands. That is,
I considered, and consider, that there is a living-being which is a
particular culture, with such a culture having been brought-into-being
(or born), and that this being is part of Nature - an emanation, a
manifestation, a presencing, of Nature - and that we, as individuals
who are or may be are part of a culture, a community, are also a
nexion. As I have described elsewhere, this
living-being is somewhat different from the living beings we are
familiar with - different from the types of life that exist on this
planet we call Earth. They are different insofar as they represent a
type of acausal being, whereas the life with which we are familiar are
essentially causal beings. That is, these acausal types of life,
present on this planet, are not separate, distinct, entities
or beings described by finite causal Space and causal Time - rather,
they are multiple-nexions, a collocation of nexions. Thus, we
individuals are - or importantly, can be - but part of the being which
is our culture, as this being
which is or which can be our culture is but part of the even larger
being which is Nature,
and as Nature - a presencing of Life, of The Numen, on this planet - is
but part of the living evolving being which is the Cosmos.
It is thus a question of dwelling in harmony with a particular
living-being - a culture - which is a certain manifestation of Nature
in a particular locality, which, by the nature of such a living-being,
is a small area which we know personally. It is also a question of
realizing that we can, by living in small rural communities according
to the ethics of empathy, compassion and honour, develope in a natural
way a new culture, many such new cultures: bring more Life into-being
and thus aid the evolution of the Cosmos itself.
All the conventional religions and conventional Ways of Life either do
not accept the reality of there being a living-being such as a culture,
and Nature, or they by their very dogma and beliefs work against such
living-beings. That is, they tend to undermine such living-beings, and
thus go against that harmony, that empathy with all Life, which we
should know and feel and which provides us with an understanding of the
meaning of our own individual existence.
Another example is the question of honour. The Numinous Way regards
honour as the basis for genuine freedom. Honour creates - honour is -
true justice. Furthermore, honour is related to, dependant upon,
empathy and compassion, and it is these three virtues that form the
Cosmic Ethic, and which thus express the essence of The Numinous Way.
All other Ways, or religions, either ignore honour, or do not regard it
as central to their own ethics.
Another example is the question of suffering - of the all-powerful
Divinity, the all-powerful Supreme Being of conventional religions,
allowing the continuation of suffering and allowing dishonour and all
that proceeds from dishonour, such as oppression, and cruelty. The
conventional answers for this problem of allowing suffering - or, to
use the terminology of theology, the answers to the problem of evil -
essentially revolve around, depend upon, concepts such as Heaven and
Hell, Jannah, sin, and Judgement of us, by some Supreme Being. The
Numinous way dissents from this view, from these concepts, and posits
instead a simple cause and effect, and the principle of personal
change: of us using our human nature, our will, to change ourselves for
the better. We do this because we understand and accept ourselves as
one
nexion - as one connexion among the matrix of connexions which is the
Life of Nature and the Life of the Cosmos beyond. Thus, The Numinous
Way views all life as a nexion - a place, in causal Space and causal
Time, where acausal energies are present. That is, what makes a certain
type of matter alive is this acausal energy. According to The Numinous
Way our foremost duty is to cease to cause suffering - to reform
ourselves, to change ourselves, to evolve ourselves, by upholding the
Cosmic Ethic. This means we have or develope empathy and compassion -
that we treasure Life, and all presencings of Life, here on this
planet, and elsewhere. That we aid the beings which are Life, which
manifest Life, such as Nature, and in culture, and that we must only
aid such beings in a moral, an honourable, way.
Another example is the question of revelation. Conventional religions
such as Christianity rely on revelation - on some
person, or some people, being favoured, or "chosen" by some Supreme
Being, with there thus being a revelation to this person, or these
people. The Numinous Way dissents from this view, believing that there
is no perfect, all-powerful Deity, no Supreme Being, no God in the
conventional sense - but rather a Cosmic Being, a living Cosmos, of
which we human beings, and Nature, are a part. The Numinous Way accepts
that this living being which is the Cosmos is changing, evolving, and
that we are part of this evolution, this change; indeed, that we can
aid this evolution, or we can, by our life, harm this evolution.
Furthermore, this conventional answer of revelation also requires that
we accept that we human beings are somehow special: that God concerns
himself with us, like some kindly father - and does not tell us about
the other life in the Cosmos. Thus, for instance, if Jesus died to
redeem us - does he have to suffer and die on other planets where
conscious life exists? Such questions seem to pose unresolved dilemmas
for conventional
religions, for it seems inconceivable to me that we human beings are
the only sentient life in the Cosmos.
Another example is the question of scriptural authority - of seeking
answers in some revealed Holy Book, some scriptures. This even applies,
it should be noted, in the case of Buddhism, where answers to moral
questions, and what are regarded as social issues,
ancient and modern, are referred to the teachings of the Buddha as
contained in such works as the Pali Canon. This produces a type of
attitude to life which The Numinous Way dissents from, for reasons I
have explained in others essays and dialogues.
Q: Can you briefly describe, then,
the attitude of The Numinous Way?
A: The attitude is one of empathy, compassion and honour - of a gentle
letting-be; a gentle striving, a dignified quest, for true harmony, for
balance.
This is balance with Nature, with other life, with the Cosmos itself.
Of being guided by the simple precepts of honour, compassion and
empathy. Of accepting that we can indeed change ourselves for the
better by upholding these precepts. Thus, we do not need scriptures;
revelation. The answers we seek are all around us - manifest in Nature;
in the presencing of Life; in the beauty of Nature and the beauty of
the Cosmos; in the perspective of Nature and the Cosmos; in the
understanding of ourselves as part of the matrix of Cosmic Life, as
part
of the Cosmic Being. This really is quite simple, and quite human.
Joyful and rather relaxed - that is, it is compassionate, and tolerant.
Q: But aren't you being somewhat
intolerant in criticizing, as you have in your previous answer, other
religions and Ways of Life and making it seem that you, in The Numinous
Way, have the right answers?
A: All I am seeking to do is to rationally give the answers I have
arrived at, through reason, empathy and experience. It is for others to
consider these answers, and judge them. They may find them useful, or
they may not. They may agree with them, or some of them; or they may
not. As I have stated several times recently, I do not consider I, or
The Numinous Way, have any monopoly on truth - I have made enough
mistakes in my life to realize that my answers may be incorrect. As for
other Ways and other religions, as I have also said and written
recently, they may express truth, or hint at it, or guide others toward
it, as they may and sometimes do presence The Numen, or manifest those
qualities, those virtues - such as compassion, honour, and love - which
are important for us, as human beings. I respect the beliefs of others,
and have no wish to undermine their faith, or whatever Way of Life they
may have accepted or are drawn toward.
Q: In your comment about Christianity
above you mentioned God as some kind of father-figure. Isn't that idea
now rather out-dated and a somewhat superficial understanding of God
and Christianity?
A: To be pedantic and unpartizan, we should perhaps speak about
the Nazarene religion, and about Nazarene theology, rather than about
Christianity, given how many people do not accept Jesus as a Messiah or
as The Messiah - but we shall pass over such pedantic things!
It is true that there has been a great development in Christian
theology, in how God is understood and perceived, and in how Jesus is
understood and perceived. This is a natural evolution of religion, as
answers are saught to questions which were not posed previously, and as
our knowledge and experience and understanding grow over the centuries,
through philosophical and religious dialogue. Science has also played a
part, bringing us new understandings, new insights, new knowledge, and
providing some plausible alternative explanations: one thinks here, for
example, of our origins as a species and the great changes that have
taken place in and on this planet over millions upon millions of years.
Thus, in a way, theology adapts itself, and often strives to express
what it regards as the fundamental truths and insights of its own Way
in new language, in new terms. Theology changes as new questions are
asked. But one of my essential points is - do we really need this
theology? Do we really need the revelation, and ideas, and concepts
such as God, sin, religious redemption, faith?
That is, is it possible for us to live morally without positing some
supreme Being, God, and/or some revelation from this God? Can we have a
genuine morality, a cessation of suffering, without God and religion?
Without faith; without some Master, to guide us? Can we have empathy
without God? Can we have humility without God? Can we change ourselves
for the better without the concepts of Sin and Heaven and Judgement
Day? Can we redeem ourselves without Jesus or the Buddha or Muhammad?
Of course, I admit the valuable role that ethical religions and ethical
Ways of Life, such as Buddhism, have played, and still play, in
changing people for the better, and in striving to change the world for
the better. But this is not to assume that they are the only answers,
the right answers - that there are not alternatives which do not
require a Supreme Being, that do not require revelation, that do not
require scriptures, or some Holy Book, or some caste or Priests or
scholars to interpret these scriptures, such books.
For another question regarding revelation - be it Christian or Muslim -
is that if God, or Allah, or the Supreme Being is perfect, and
All-Knowing, then why are the books containing the revelations,
containing the word of God, of Allah, are as they are? Why do they not
contain information - such as scientific information - unknown at the
time, and why are they not clear, precise, and not open to
interpretation? Those who believe such works of revelation to be
divinely inspired, or to be the actual word of God, of Allah, have
answers to such questions - and all these answers require us to have
faith; to believe that God/Allah considered us, or considers us, to be
in need of guidance, in terms that we could understand, at the time of
such revelation and given the nature of the people to whom the
revelation was first addressed, and that the form of revelation is
itself a kind of test, for us. But The Numinous Way dissents from this
view, and posits a Way of Life, a perspective, and answers, which do
not require the assumption of God, the assumption of revelation, and
the changing theology which always derives from such things.
Q: But isn't the Cosmic Being
just another name for God?
A: Most certainly not, although perhaps the distinction
has not been made as clear as it should have done or could have done.
God, and Allah, imply a perfect, all-powerful Being who is conscious in
a quite literal way and who is also supreme, The Creator. This Being is
Unchanging, and we are enjoined to worship this Being; to obey this
Being, as we are told we shall one day be judged by this Being, who
will reward us, or punish us. This Being may be said to watch over us,
to guide us, and to be concerned about us - and our relation to this
Being is one of a certain if not literal inferiority. We are the
creations of this Being, as our Fate depends on, or is determined by,
this Being, to whom we can pray and make supplications, either
directly, or, in the case of Christianity, through certain
intermediaries, such as The Blessed Virgin Mary.
In contrast, the Cosmic Being is the Cosmos in evolution; this Being is
not perfect; not all powerful; and it is also changing, evolving, just
as it is not outside of the Cosmos, or outside of us, or outside of
life. Rather, this Being is the Life of the Cosmos, as we are part of
the
consciousness of this Being, and just as we can aid this Being, or harm
this Being, by what we do, or do not do.
Thus, our relationship to this Being is very different from the
relationship which Christianity and Islam posit vis-s-vis our
relationship with God and Allah. In a profound way - very different
from theology - this Being is within us because we are a manifestation
of Life; because we are one nexion among the matrix of nexions that are
the Life of the Cosmos. We, and all life, in the Cosmos, are this
Being, changing;
this Being evolving, learning, developing self-awareness,
consciousness. Thus, we have a duty of care, toward this Being; a duty
of love and compassion - not some duty of obedience; not some fear.
Furthermore, we determine our own Fate, to a great degree - because we
human beings possess the ability to change ourselves for the better;
the ability to participate in a positive way with the evolution of Life
and thus the evolution of the Cosmos, with the evolution of the Cosmic
Being.
That is, our life, our existence, our very Thought, can and does have
an affect, on us, on other human beings, on Life, on the Cosmos. In
truth, our purpose is to attain a correct, a natural, balance with
Nature, with the Cosmos, and thus within ourselves - to change
ourselves in a positive way - so that we can cease to cause suffering,
and can consciously participate in this evolution, which becomes our
own evolution, in both causal and acausal Time and Space. We
participate in it through empathy, which correctly understood, is an
extension of our existence, our consciousness, our Thought, our being,
and the beginning of this change is to appreciate, to feel, the
perspective of Life, of the Cosmos; to understand ourselves as but one
nexion, one small presencing of Life upon one planet. Hence, our prayer
is empathy, as us causing suffering is us harming this Being, harming
Life, and undermining the natural balance which is necessary for Life
and for positive change, for evolution, with evolution here understood
as the increase of empathy, the decrease of suffering, the increase of
consciousness.
However, it is perhaps possible to equate this Cosmic Being with God,
with Allah - The Compassionate, The Most Merciful - as some Christian
mystics and some Sufis have done. Or, at the very least, to find some
common ground between such a cosmic Being, and that Being we know as
God, as Allah, The Compassionate, The Most Merciful. It depends on the
assumptions made; on the perspective; on ontology.
Q: What is your reaction to - and do
you
have any comment on - those people, especially those who espouse racial
nationalist or who call themselves National Socialists, who describe
you as traitor for your involvement with Islam, and who say you are
weird or mad or a psychopath or belong in some insane asylum?
A: For many years, I have not been bothered by what people say or write
or
believe about me, for I go and have gone my own way - and this personal
way, for many many years, has been a journey of exploration, of
discovery, of experience, according to the ethic of honour. I dedicated
more than thirty years of my life to fighting, often in practical way,
for the principles I believed in and which I considered, at the time,
were right and just, and endured two terms of imprisonment for those
beliefs. I have attended many demonstrations, spoken at many, many
public and private meetings, addressed crowds of thousands of people,
been involved in many street fights and brawls, and so on. I have even
led, for certain periods, some radical organizations. I have been
vilified and lied about in the Media, and had disinformation and lies
spread about me. So I am not without some practical experience.
I always tried, before my reversion to Islam, to do what I considered
was good for my people, my
folk - and this arose from a genuine and deep love of my folk and my
own homeland. But there were several times when I, even with all
my idealism and fanaticism, became disillusioned and wondered why I
bothered, given the propensity of so-called "comrades" and colleagues
to believe lies and rumours, and given the propensity of some to be
disloyal, to show no concern for honour, or - it must be said - to not
even know or feel what honour is.
Over the past seven and more years I have reviewed every thing I
believed
in, as I have also
tried to admit my mistakes, and learn from them. I have also saught
to answer some of the most fundamental and perplexing questions about
life, about our existence. I had been searching for such
answers since I was around thirteen years old, and in the course of
this search I saught practical involvement with many of the major
religions of the world. In this search, I have gone beyond
Christianity, Buddhism,
and nationalism, and
beyond National-Socialism itself - creating, in effect, a new,
apolitical and
ethical Way of Life which I believe is important for
us, as human beings, and important for Nature and the
living-beings of Nature, such as a unique culture. But these are just
some of my
answers, as The Numinous Way can be considered just one
philosophy of life among many. Other people are free to reject these
answers, this new
philosophy - and I am not concerned if they do so reject them; for
there is
no longer any desire to proselytize; no fanaticism; no arrogant belief
that The Numinous Way is right: only a gentle feeling about life, a
certain empathy
with Nature, with the living-beings of Nature, with the Cosmos itself,
Only
a certain knowing of the natural beauty of living, the natural beauty
of existence which we humans, sadly, so often undermine, obscure or
tend to destroy through our ideas, our abstractions, our arrogance, our
hubris, our selfishness, our lack of honour, our lack of empathy and
compassion.
Rigorously following where Cosmic Ethics - the ethics of empathy,
honour, and compassion - lead, we arrive at certain
conclusions, which some or many people may dislike, for whatever reason
or
reasons. Thus, The Numinous Way rejects what is called racism, racial
prejudice and the immoral notion of racial superiority; rejecting the
abstraction of race, of nationalism: of
using such things to judge individuals or to assign a value to an
individual. In addition, The Numinous Way leads to an
affirmation, on moral grounds, of such things as
vegetarianism. Also, following this, we
cannot find any moral justification for large scale war, or any moral
justification for the primitive and barbaric concept of imprisoning
people for years.
The guidelines of The Numinous Way are now, and have been for a some
time, the morality of
honour, empathy and compassion. Those who adhere to this Way are not
concerned about what is
termed politics, or about "being popular", or how The Numinous Way
itself is are regarded. They
are as they are, as I am as I am. Those who have taken the trouble to
read such things as the letters of mine which have been published, my
recent writings, and my poetry, should be
able to understand the progression of my thinking over the years, and
my search for answers.
Certainly, and especially in my recent personal letters, I have striven
to be honest about my feelings; about my doubts; about my mistakes;
about the inner struggles that have sometimes consumed me, often as a
result of some personal tragedy.
As for those who make personally offensive remarks about me - I might
ask them what criteria, or what information, they use to base their
views, their opinions, on, and if they know or feel what honour means,
for certainly the honourable thing is to take the trouble to find out,
in person, to seek to know, or to keep quiet about someone they have no
direct personal knowledge of. Certainly most of the views and opinions
of such people seem to be ill-informed, or based upon rumours or
dis-information about me, or derive from their own often dishonourable
feelings or instincts. But such is human life and human nature - for
the present, as it has been, sadly, for thousands upon thousands of
years.
Q: In some of your most recent
writings you have stated that you - and the The Numinous Way itself -
have gone beyond even the concept of the folk. Can you explain this in
more detail?
A: When I began developing what I first called "Folk Culture" and then
The Numinous Way of Folk Culture, there was still some importance
placed on what I described as "the folk", which I then considered as a
living-being, a nexion, which I assumed was distinct from the abstract
idea of race. Indeed, I tried to make a clear distinction between
"race" and "folk", writing that a folk was essentially a clan, a tribe,
of individuals - a small grouping - who shared the same ancestral
heritage, the same genetic heritage, and who dwelled in the same area.
I contrast this with the abstraction of "race" and regarded small,
rural "folk communities" as worth conserving and nurturing, or worthy
of
being brought into-being.
However, the more I developed the ethics of The Numinous Way, the more
I realized that, if used as a criteria of judgement, of value, this
"folk" was itself divisive, an abstraction, and
thus a cause of - or the potential cause of - suffering and
intolerance, of judging other than by empathy and the criteria of
honour. That is, to promote such a thing as as a priority, as a
necessary criteria- or as the
criteria - was, and is, in itself unethical. Thus
I have had to abandon this concept of "the folk" as a necessary
criteria, as one foundation, one basis - the basis - of The Numinous Way.
Q: Haven't you, in some of your newer writings, just replaced this
concept of the folk with that of
"culture"?
No, for a culture is just what arises - or which can naturally arise -
when people live together in a community or in a collection of small
communities in a certain locality, and "people" here is left
unspecific,
independent of ethnicity, of "race", of nationalism, and of other such
things, or whatever terms we use to describe such criteria which have
to defined based on some arbitrary un-numinous abstraction.
However, a new culture can arise - and often in the past has naturally
arisen - from people of the same folk who live together in small
communities, with such a culture thus representing the ethos of those
people, and being thus a living-being. In the same way, a culture can
arise, in the future, from people who are from diverse folks, and this
itself has often happened in the past. What matters is to respect this
diversity, and not use an abstract criteria as a basis for judgement of
such a culture and the individuals within it.
Cultures are born and, like all living things, they can thrive or not,
just as they all change over causal Time and all have a limited cause
life. Certain Ways of Life can produce a culture - for example
Buddhism, and Islam - just as the interaction of people of different
"ethnicity" can produce and have produced a new culture or cultures,
and no abstraction, no abstract criteria, should be used to judge such
cultures, any culture, and the individuals of such cultures. That is,
we apply the ethical criteria of tolerance, of a natural letting-be,
considering them as emanations of the Life, manifestations of the flux
of Life, presenced on this planet.
Hence, there is an empathic non-interference, for we only interfere in
some matter when it is question of immediacy, of direct personal
honour: of personal and direct concern to us and our family. To
interference - to judge - on the basis of some abstraction is simply
unethical.
Q: Does this mean that you will have
to revise many of your older writings about The Numinous Way, about
Folk Culture?
Not really. I have revised a few, but as for the others, they are what
they are - my older writings.
Q: So, the emphasis has shifted from folk to culture?
Yes - with the emphasis now being on the ethical values of empathy,
compassion and personal honour, on not pre-judging individuals, and on
not using abstractions (including the folk and a folkish-culture) as a
criteria of value, and on respecting the various living-beings, such as
the various cultures, which exist, which have arisen, or which can and
will arise, which will come-into-being, from whomsoever they arise,
such as from people of diverse folks.
Q: You mentioned the beauty of life -
can you expand upon this?
A: Yes, I do feel that life is and should be beautiful: that we should,
each and everyone of us, be able to feel this beauty, experience this
beauty.
Life has so many wonderful possibilities, just as we human beings are
wonderful beings - full of potential.
This is why allegories such as the mythos of Jesus, of the Passion, can
and have filled us with wonder and joy - why such allegories, such
mythos, still move us and still are saught. For they remind us of what
many of us feel, deeply: that life can and should be good. That there
is a meaning, somewhere. That certain things are wrong; and certain
things are right. We human beings need to feel, to know, The Numen - we
need to have what is numinous presenced in our life, through something:
be this a mythos; a fable; a legend; an allegory; a ritual; a ceremony;
a piece of music, a loving partner, a religion, or a Way of Life.
But we are still half-savage; still half-barbarian, or, rather,
often more than half - and so commit hubris: we trample down, upon,
what is numinous; we scorn it. We let our desires overwhelm us and
create, perpetuate, suffering. We can be and often are callous, and in
thrall to abstractions, to ideas, which we worship and which we put in
place of The Numen; abstractions and ideas such as some nation, or some
State, or some leader, or some religion, or some political view, some
ideology, some -ocracy or
some -ism, which we seek to
impose upon
others by brute force, through propaganda, through war.
So, instead of letting The Numen - the beautiful, the sacred, the
numinous possibilities of Life, the matrix of the nexions of the Cosmos
- suffuse us and live within us and change us for the better, we kill;
we torture; we lie; we imprison; we steal; we cheat; we connive; we
manipulate. Instead of reforming ourselves, first, and being moral, and
being content with seeking an inner harmony, we become hypocrites and
seek to impose ourselves, and our abstractions, our -ologies, upon
others while forgetting or ignoring or not even knowing our own faults,
our own failings, our own weakness.
Now, we are reaching the stage - partly due to technology - where even
the balance of Nature is threatened by our hubris, our arrogance, our
barbarism, our inability to control ourselves, our addiction to ideas,
materialism and hypocrisy. How many millions upon millions upon
millions of people have been killed - how many injured; how many have
suffered - in the past hundred years through wars, conducted with
weapons created by technology? How much devastation has been caused by
these wars? By the rapacious materialism of capitalism; by our own
greed? In many ways, technology has not freed us - it has enslaved us,
and made us able to commit hubris, to practice hypocrisy and greed, to
conduct war and oppression, to commit injustice, on a scale far larger
than our so-called barbarian ancestors. Technology has also enabled us
to distract ourselves - to allow us to be distracted - from the Numen
of Life, just as it has distanced many of us, especially in what is
called the West,
from Nature, from the slow natural rhythm and quietness of Nature which
often is the beginning of personal wisdom. In place of this
naturally-grown, personally acquired, wisdom we imbibe abstractions,
vain empty cleverness, and propaganda, with many people becoming like
some mass-produced clones: their ideas, their way of life, their
opinions, their desires, their prejudices, given to them, manufactured
for them, by governments, by Corporations, by commercial and political
factions.
In all these things, the beauty of Life becomes lost or can become
lost. It certainly has become lost for millions upon millions of
people, world-wide, who are starving; who are oppressed; who are under
occupation by some foreign Army or controlled by some tyrant or some
tyrannical idea or some political abstraction. It is certainly lost for
the millions upon millions who daily suffer some dishonourable deed
undertaken by another human being - a rape, perhaps; a killing; a
robbery... So many thousands of years for so little understanding; for
so little real, inner, change toward harmony and the cessation of
suffering.
In many ways, many of those in the West are indeed
fortunate because their societies are fairly stable and prosperous, and
they have a certain freedom, and a certain leisure, so that they and we
can
feel The Numen - become aware of
beauty, or are aware of beauty, presenced in a piece of music,
perhaps; or through a walk in some beautiful countryside; or through a
personal love; through a work of Art, or literature, or through some
other particular intimation. They are also fortunate in that they have
a
vast treasure of such presencings - in recorded music, for instance, or
through accessible literature and Art - as they also have such people
as
professional artists, musicians, and Institutions supporting these, and
centres of learning, many with a long tradition. Thus, they can attend
concerts of glorious numinous music performed well, as they can seek
out
and learn about and appreciate the Art, the music, the literature, the
learning of the past.
Many in the West are thus fortunate, even though certain
intimations of The
Numen, certain manifestations of beauty, are increasingly disappearing
and often not appreciated, within the societies, the homelands, of the
West. In particular they are losing, in their modern urbanized,
technological way of living, in their quest for more luxury and
comfort,
an appreciation of the beauty, the quiet, of unspoilt Nature - as they
are losing the natural, unspoilt places where the beauty and the
quietness, the sacredness, of Nature can be felt and known and
appreciated. This is very sad, but is a natural consequence of our
greed, our desire for comfort, our selfishness, our failure to place
ourselves in the context of Nature, in the context of the Cosmos - that
is, it is failure of morality, a failure to appreciate and feel beauty;
a failure of meaning. Some would also say: it is a failure to know God,
a failure to know Allah - The Compassionate, The Most Merciful - which
failure results from the pride, the arrogance, of hubris, which hubris
is it seems increasingly coming to be the way of the West.
Q: But didn't you, for a long time,
preach and agitate for the violent overthrow of the West?
A: Yes, because I myself was in thrall to various abstractions and
because I did not fully understand the morality, the perspective,
involved.
To evolve - toward a genuine empathy with all life, with Nature and the
Cosmos, toward the next stage of our existence - The Numinous Way
inclines toward the view that we must develope an
inner harmony which is a reflexion of the harmony of Nature and the
Cosmos. To do this, it suggests that we must gently strive to presence
the numinous in
our
own lives, and learn to abide in acausal Time rather than in the causal
Time of the modern world with its hubris and lack of empathy and
compassion. That is, there should be an inner change, an inner
transformation toward the numinous, toward The Numen, toward beauty and
harmony, and it is this inner, personal, individual change which is
moral, which presences the numinous and which thus does not cause
suffering or add to suffering.
According to The Numinous Way, the change of agitation, of political
strife, of revolution, of armed
struggle, is a causal change, based in causal Time, and often or mostly
causes suffering, creates suffering, adds to suffering, and more often
than not does not contribute to the development of genuine inner
harmony, to the presencing of the numinous. That is, it undermines and
often destroys the beauty of Life, as the changes it provokes or causes
or almost always only temporary ones, lasting a few years, a few
decades, at most a hundred years or so. Thus, the suffering such causal
provokations cause does not achieve what the adherents of such
provokations believe they do. I, in my limited way, know this from
experience, for I made this mistake myself, many times over the decades.
What does fundamentally change people, the world, toward The Numen,
toward a genuine understanding and appreciation of Life, is that which
expresses, which presences beauty; that which is numinous - and it is
these changes caused by such presencings which endure, long after some
revolution, long after some war, long after some Empire, long after
some tyrant, and long after some political Party or other. Why do such
things endure so? Because they express, they capture,
they presence, something of the acausal, while causal forms - such as
some political strife or struggle - are firmly rooted in the causal.
But this understanding aside, we must also judge such causal things -
such transient forms such as some struggle, political or otherwise -
morally. That is, we must apply the ethics of honour, compassion and
empathy, the ethics of The Numinous way, to such things. Thus, do such
things alleviate, can they alleviate, suffering? Do they cause
suffering? Do they take away personal honour? Do they allow for
personal honour? Judged in this way, we find such things immoral.
Q: How do you see the future,
especially of the West?
A: It all depends upon what assumptions we make. However, it does
seem clear that things cannot go on as they are for many more
centuries.
That is, given the increase in human population; given the rapacious
use of the natural resources of this planet; given the increasing
urbanization; given the proliferation of armed conflicts, and given the
changes that do seem to be occurring in Nature as a result of our
activity, one change being that in our climate, and another the
increasing extinction of species of life and the destruction of
habitats. When we factor in such things as greed; dishonour; lack of
empathy and lack of compassion, the continuing reliance upon
abstractions, upon -isms and -ologies - that is, the
continuation of
human barbarism, stupidity and selfishness - and when we consider that
millions of people are still dying from hunger, and millions upon
millions live in squalor, then we might consider we have reason to be
rather pessimistic about our future.
Billions of people are not suddenly going to change - they are not
suddenly going to become honourable, compassionate, empathic human
beings. They are not suddenly going to stop being selfish and stop
desiring comfort and the many material things that exist in the West.
War, armed conflict, and strife are not suddenly going to vanish.
As for the West, the three greatest problems are firstly the hypocrisy
of its
governments, and of many of its people; secondly, its innate and
immoral sense of
superiority; and thirdly the continuing immigration of people into its
lands.
Its immoral sense of superiority is what has led it into colonialism in
the past and led it more recently into a new type of that old
colonialism. Now, it seeks to impose what its leaders, governments and
many of its people regard as its superior and "civilized" way of life,
its concepts and ideas, upon others. Chief among the concepts and ideas
which it desires to impose upon others - by force of arms if necessary,
as evident in Iraq and Afghanistan and in Vietnam - are what is called
democracy, the abstract idea of the nation-State, and
consumer-capitalism.
The hypocrisy of the West is evident, for example, in two things.
Firstly, in its desire to export its way of life, its concept and
values, to others, while ignoring the problems within its own societies
- the problems of poverty; of corruption; of inequality; of a lack of
honour. Secondly, in the double standards it uses - as for example in:
(1) the fact that it allows, tolerates and even encourages a country
such as the Zionist entity which occupies Palestine to have nuclear and
biological weapons, and
allows that country to invade and occupy other lands, to assassinate
other people, but will not tolerate a country such as Iran possessing
nuclear weapons; and in (2) that fact that it regards itself above the
law, evident most blatantly in the disregard of the United States for
the Geneva convention in respect of its detainees in places such as
Guantanamo Bay; in its torture of detainees, and in the
propaganda and excuses it uses to excuse or cover-up such torture, and
the propaganda and excuses it makes for its killing of civilians in
areas of conflict, while condemning the killing of civilians by those
it
regards as its enemies. Thus, the West, by its actions for a period of
well over eighty years, has forfeited the right to assume, as it does,
in its hypocrisy, the "moral high ground" - forfeited the right to
preach to the peoples of the world.
In respect of immigration, this is and will be a problem for the West
because it is changing, over a long period of time, the very nature of
the West itself and placing something of a strain on its resources as
well as creating some social problems. This immigration of peoples into
the prosperous West will most probably continue and increase,
regardless of what measures the governments of the West may introduce
to limit it. It is possible to envisage a future, not that distant,
when the majority of peoples resident in Europe are from African and
Asian lands, and where people from Mexico, and South America, will be
the majority in parts of America. This change will itself probably lead
to a change of policy and a change of direction for the nations of the
West because, for example, of how such people will vote, and this
change does not
even consider the growing influence of countries such as China, even
though America is trying hard to counter this growing influence by
aiding the development of consumer-capitalism in China, which thus
gives America some financial influence which they hope they can use in
a clandestine political way. Thus,
given such things as these, it does seem probable that the current
policies of the West may well change significantly over the next fifty
to
one hundred years.
Will this change be for the better? And what is "better"? Would
this "better" be a change toward compassion, empathy and honour? - and
thus be an personal
inner, change, in individuals; a change toward less or no interference
in the affairs of others; a change toward doing something practical and
effective about the problems of hunger and poverty, industrialization,
and the rapacious use of natural resources? Would this "better" be the
West
using its resources to begin the exploration and settlement of Space -
so that instead of funding foreign wars, instead of invading other
lands and engaging in global armed conflict, instead of diverting
resources to fund large armies and arsenals, it devoted itself to the
worthwhile and evolutionary goal of Space exploration and settlement,
and the worthy goal of respecting the living-being that is Nature?
Personally, I consider that things will get worse, possibly much worse,
for both the world and the West, before there is a slow change for the
better, toward a more moral, toward a numinous, way of life.
Q: Are you documenting one person's
journey through life, to thus inspire others to live as some kind of
explorer?
A: I am just attempting to write as and when as an aid to
my own self-understanding and insight and development. If others find
what is written of interest or value, fine; if not, it does not matter.
I am not interested anymore in inspiring others in some kind of
political or even social way - only in working things out for myself;
moving forward; ceasing to cause suffering. To make public what is
written so that others can see my errors, my mistakes, my searching, my
answers, and so there is a public record, assuming anyone is
interested, of those answers, and this questioning and this inner
struggle, and it has been a struggle, these past five or six years, and
especially these past few months. If what I write contributes in some
small way to some others, however small in number, understanding
themselves, the world, the Cosmos - so that they cease to cause
suffering, and aid The Numen, in whatever way - then that is and would
be good.
(Revised 2454586.531)
Compassion,
Empathy and Honour
Frequently
Asked Questions About The Numinous Way
Presencing
The Numen
A Personal
Learning
How Do
We Know In Our Anguish?
The
Origin of the Good
A
Numinous Future
Personal,
Social and Family Values