|
When it became quiet enough again for me to speak, I explained that the "eye for an eye" policy was not a part of the Decalogue at all. It became a part of the perversion of it. I suggested that the perversion is useful when it is seen as an after-statement. In that context it serves as a warning of what will inevitably unfold if the underlying principles of the Decalogue are not recognized or not understood. I described the Decalogue as a statement of principles without which civilization cannot exist.
I explained that the Decalogue presents a series of demands that relate to fundamental principle that are uniquely ordered in the sequence of our difficulty in understanding them. I suggested that the first demand, not to kill one another is actually the easiest of them all. It reflects the active principle that defines every human being as a worthy member of society, as a human being with the capacity to create, to produce, and thereby to enrich our human world. This makes killing undesirable. The recognition of this principle then sets the stage for the second demand, that one does not break the honorable bonds that unfold between human beings. The active principle, here, is the universality of love. I said that this principle is not easily acknowledged, but needs to be acknowledged. In other words, love cannot be limited or else it would violate the first principle of the universality of human worth. I said that the next demand, which is not to steal, has an underlying active principle that is even more difficult to implement. This principle demands one to actively enrich one another's existence. I suggested that if this isn't done, people do literally steal from one another as they destroy the vital element that makes our human world a rich place in an otherwise empty and cold world. In political terms, this principle is reflected in the general welfare principle that should be enshrined in the constitution of every nation to guide its policies.
The fourth demand is that one does not lie to one another, or more fundamentally, that one does not lie to oneself in denying ones innermost nature as a human being. The active principle in this case demands that one acknowledge the riches of the human being in terms of its potential scientific, technological, and cultural development, even ones own potential for developing oneself individually and for uplifting the world. This principle is not easily applied in an imperial and competitive environment where the incentive is put forward for tearing one another down. Nevertheless, this principle is imperative. This principle, in turn, sets the stage for the final demand, the demand not to covet property. The active principle, in this case, is universal sovereignty and freedom - freedom to develop and freedom to love. Unfortunately this is also the hardest principle to implement. The clamor for property underlies all imperial issues and motives. It underlies all of its apparent glitter and its apparent riches, but also all wars; all genocide; all slavery; violence; deprivations; fascism; and terrorism.
I suggested that the students search through the background of their own cultural history for a parallel to these five principles. I suggested that they appear to be reflected in the teachings of Confucius. I told the students that the modern western degenerative, so-called Christian doctrines, such as the "eye for an eye" doctrine, and all the other murderous penalties found in Hebrew law, are actually imperial creations enshrined as law by a powerful, religiously centered oligarchy that had created these laws for its own interests in its quest for dominance and power. "This doctrinal imposition still rules in our modern time," I warned the students, "whenever imperial doctrines are enshrined as law. This imperial imposition governs more and more of the policies of humanity today," I added.
I told the audience that America fell deeply into this trap from the first day on when it allowed itself to become the servant of the British Empire a long time ago, which at the time was the last of the old world-engulfing empires. "Our task must be to get America out of this trap," I said to the students. "We must free America together with every other nation or religion that has become similarly entrapped." It told them quite simply that it was in their own interest to fight for this process of uplifting humanity to a new sense of human dignity and worth, and potential in enriching the world, even the universe. I suggested that every person assembled in the auditorium must realize that China has no security for as long as the vital task for the liberation of humanity as a whole is not fulfilled. "If we allow America to remain trapped in its servitude to an imperial oligarchy, even if this oligarchy exists right in its midst, then we tend to become trapped ourselves into the same servitude, as indeed, large segments of the American population already has become entrapped, without knowing that they have. And that goes for everyone else. In other words, no nation can be free and have a bright future until all nations are free and join hands in creating this future," I added.
Next Page
|| - page index -
|| - chapter index -
|| - Exit -
||
|
