Post by david on Jan 20, 2009 22:29:40 GMT -8
On New Year’s day, while contemplating my annual list of promises-to-be broken, I had yet another epiphany – the latest in a growing tally of revelations resulting in part from participation in my LifeWriting class.
A standard entry on many resolution to-do lists is one version or another of the Golden Rule.
Attributed to Jesus (Matthew 7, Verse 12), the instruction is one version or another of, “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.”
Until 2009, I accepted the wisdom of this directive without question. It seemed unambiguous, clear and very proper. After all, if I valued or desired something what greater gift could I bestow on another person than to give them the thing I wished for?
But this year, as I dutifully added the highly acclaimed Beatitude to my humble list, a warning light flashed inside my head. Something suddenly didn’t seem quite right about that old phrase.
A month ago, I boldly offer advice to would-be Santa Clause impersonators, I included the reminder that being Santa isn’t about the actor portraying the role; it’s about the children and others who will project their excitement, joy and love onto the image being presented.
In short, Santa isn’t the point. At best, he’s an enabler or facilitator that empowers others to experience happiness as they define it.
And so, I realized this year, it should be for practitioners of a Golden Rule.
The current iteration implies that the best way to determine what will benefit others is to explore our own psychic apparatus: our personal set of measurements for success, happiness and meaning in life.
When parsed, the Golden Rule seems to be telling us to give other people what we want.
The commandment, “Give other people what you want for yourself,” lacks the poetic appeal of the original. But isn’t the meaning equivalent?
As a lover of spicy food, should I indiscriminately serve Jalapeños to dinner guests without considering their own gastronomical preferences or limitations? Loving rap music played at extremely high volume, should I indiscriminately share my collection with my neighbors?
The matter takes on dimensions of life-and-death when applied to public policy. In the name of Jesus, the Crusaders launched nine invasions into the Middle East over a 200-year period that occurred in the middle of the aptly named “Dark Ages.”
One justification for religious wars – which continue today – is a distortion, perhaps, of the Golden Rule: If we were infidels, doomed to spend eternity in Hell, would we not want to be converted to the true faith so we could instead reside in Heaven?
Both sides of religious wars view the other side as “d**ned” and each believes conquest to be in the interest of those who are conquered, that it is their only hope of salvation.
Oh, doing to others what we wish they, in different circumstances, would to to us is a practice fraught with danger.
As with Santa Claus, the key to doing good deeds is understanding that the deed must suit its recipient, not the giver.
Believing I had come up with something new, I proceeded with some research for this writing.
Lo and behold, a Google™ search unearthed more than a million hits to the phrase “do unto others as they would like done unto them.” So much for an original thought…
But further research revealed that the traditional rule is deeply ingrained and is almost universally present among religions and cultures. Similar principles are part of religious creeds throughout the world:
Taoism: “Regard your neighbor’s gain as your own gain and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss.”
Judaism: “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow.”
Jainism: “Just as pain is not agreeable to you, it is so with others. Knowing this principle of equality, treat others with respect and compassion.”
Islam: “None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.”
Hinduism: “One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one’s own self.”
Confucianism: “Never impost on others what you would not choose for yourself.”
Bahai: “If thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbour that which thou choosest for thyself."
Buddhism: “Putting oneself in the place of another.”
In 1993, a team of 200 religious scholars from around the world developed a document titled, “The declaration of a global ethic.” It was signed by 143 leaders from all of the world’s leading faiths.”
The declaration is just 650 words, including the following: “We must treat others as we wish others to treat us.” Yep, the old standard Golden Rule.
-----------
Well, I interrupted this love fest and took time to go forth and practice…
…not practice what I’ve been preaching, I fear; I’ve used my first opportunity for change in the new year to revert completely into my bad old self.
For a full report on my evil deed, see “Billy Jack shops at Wal-Mart.”
So much for good intentions.
A standard entry on many resolution to-do lists is one version or another of the Golden Rule.
Attributed to Jesus (Matthew 7, Verse 12), the instruction is one version or another of, “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.”
Until 2009, I accepted the wisdom of this directive without question. It seemed unambiguous, clear and very proper. After all, if I valued or desired something what greater gift could I bestow on another person than to give them the thing I wished for?
But this year, as I dutifully added the highly acclaimed Beatitude to my humble list, a warning light flashed inside my head. Something suddenly didn’t seem quite right about that old phrase.
A month ago, I boldly offer advice to would-be Santa Clause impersonators, I included the reminder that being Santa isn’t about the actor portraying the role; it’s about the children and others who will project their excitement, joy and love onto the image being presented.
In short, Santa isn’t the point. At best, he’s an enabler or facilitator that empowers others to experience happiness as they define it.
And so, I realized this year, it should be for practitioners of a Golden Rule.
The current iteration implies that the best way to determine what will benefit others is to explore our own psychic apparatus: our personal set of measurements for success, happiness and meaning in life.
When parsed, the Golden Rule seems to be telling us to give other people what we want.
The commandment, “Give other people what you want for yourself,” lacks the poetic appeal of the original. But isn’t the meaning equivalent?
As a lover of spicy food, should I indiscriminately serve Jalapeños to dinner guests without considering their own gastronomical preferences or limitations? Loving rap music played at extremely high volume, should I indiscriminately share my collection with my neighbors?
The matter takes on dimensions of life-and-death when applied to public policy. In the name of Jesus, the Crusaders launched nine invasions into the Middle East over a 200-year period that occurred in the middle of the aptly named “Dark Ages.”
One justification for religious wars – which continue today – is a distortion, perhaps, of the Golden Rule: If we were infidels, doomed to spend eternity in Hell, would we not want to be converted to the true faith so we could instead reside in Heaven?
Both sides of religious wars view the other side as “d**ned” and each believes conquest to be in the interest of those who are conquered, that it is their only hope of salvation.
Oh, doing to others what we wish they, in different circumstances, would to to us is a practice fraught with danger.
As with Santa Claus, the key to doing good deeds is understanding that the deed must suit its recipient, not the giver.
Believing I had come up with something new, I proceeded with some research for this writing.
Lo and behold, a Google™ search unearthed more than a million hits to the phrase “do unto others as they would like done unto them.” So much for an original thought…
But further research revealed that the traditional rule is deeply ingrained and is almost universally present among religions and cultures. Similar principles are part of religious creeds throughout the world:
Taoism: “Regard your neighbor’s gain as your own gain and your neighbor’s loss as your own loss.”
Judaism: “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow.”
Jainism: “Just as pain is not agreeable to you, it is so with others. Knowing this principle of equality, treat others with respect and compassion.”
Islam: “None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.”
Hinduism: “One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one’s own self.”
Confucianism: “Never impost on others what you would not choose for yourself.”
Bahai: “If thine eyes be turned towards justice, choose thou for thy neighbour that which thou choosest for thyself."
Buddhism: “Putting oneself in the place of another.”
In 1993, a team of 200 religious scholars from around the world developed a document titled, “The declaration of a global ethic.” It was signed by 143 leaders from all of the world’s leading faiths.”
The declaration is just 650 words, including the following: “We must treat others as we wish others to treat us.” Yep, the old standard Golden Rule.
-----------
Well, I interrupted this love fest and took time to go forth and practice…
…not practice what I’ve been preaching, I fear; I’ve used my first opportunity for change in the new year to revert completely into my bad old self.
For a full report on my evil deed, see “Billy Jack shops at Wal-Mart.”
So much for good intentions.