How religion improves civilization through progressive revelation.

I wrote this today as a response to a question on the forum Quora (www.quora.com).  The question was: "Would big societies be able to exist without people believing in religions?"  Some people said "yes" and went on to tell about all the bad things that they find to be associated with religion.  I can see their points, but I still maintain that when a religion has become strongly established in a culture, it becomes polluted by politics, and other human frailties and so loses much of its true worth.  This was my response, for what it's worth:

I read a study a few years ago (and I apologize for not having the reference) that gave evidence that in primitive societies religion was a needed cohesive influence for cooperation and prevention of conflict in groups of more than about 20 to 30 individuals.  Most religions provide:

1) A common commitment to a set of values which prevent the strong and/or greedy from destroying the life of kinder and/or weaker people and regulate how common resources are to be used.

2) Shared rights, celebrations, rituals, symbols etc. which provide a sense of community.

3) A sense that there is a higher power (god or gods) which has authority to make laws and demand sacrifices. (Such laws and sacrifices being for the common good as much as to please the higher power.)

Consider the 10 commandments:

The first 4 (No other gods, No graven images (i.e., objects to worship), Don't take the Lord's name in vain, and Remember the sabbath and keep it holy) have the purpose of establishing loyalty, reverence, and a community activity which leads to the unity and agreement of the religious community.

The other six are laws which are important to establishing cooperation, trust, and justice.  Basically, they are necessary in order to develop  those institutions (like commerce, supportive families, specialized tradespeople, etc.) that we take for granted in our present society.

If you look at experiments in game theory, (like "the prisoners' dilemma") you see that unless there is a consensus that people cooperate, it is often to an individual's advantage to be greedy or self-serving.  However, if there is a consensus to cooperate and follow certain rules of behavior, then every one benefits and most every person in that society has a much better quality of life than even the strongest most ruthless self-server in a non-consensual "society".

The pioneers of new religions, those who sacrifice self-interest in order to follow a higher level of rules for cooperative behavior, despite the fact that the rest of society opposes them, are the ones who eventually bring about that higher level of cooperation and therefore general prosperity for the rest of the population.  Eventually, most of the population is following these rules and agrees that they are "just common sense if you want to live in a decent  civilization."  Whether or not the believe in the deity or the religion, they are following consensual, society-and-individual-strengthening behaviors which were originally brought into common practice by religion.
The problem we see now are partly due to there being such a huge human population on the earth. In the competition for resources, including human resources, the various religious groups, while somewhat internally cohesive, are at odds with each other.  Meanwhile, advances in science have brought us powerful technologies which can be developed and used either for the improvement of life, or for its degradation and destruction.  Unless all the nations, cultures, races and religions can learn to cooperate, the conflicts will continue to the point of a world wide disaster which could make the world wars look like a football match in comparison.
I believe that, once again, the bar for cooperative behavior is being raised by an emerging religion, and that many of its principles (like equality of the sexes and of all races, elimination of prejudice, and universal education) are becoming accepted as the norm by civilized people everywhere.

What defines other people?

(Has it really been nearly 3 months since I last posted?  I have this for today, and have news to post in the near future.  I see that if I want to keep folks informed, I must exercise a bit more discipline!)


The first Baha’i book I ever read was “The Hidden Words of Baha’u’llah”.  The book begins with this description of itself:

HE IS THE GLORY OF GLORIES
This is that which hath descended from the realm of glory, uttered by the tongue of power and might, and revealed unto the Prophets of old. We have taken the inner essence thereof and clothed it in the garment of brevity, as a token of grace unto the righteous, that they may stand faithful unto the Covenant of God, may fulfill in their lives His trust, and in the realm of spirit obtain the gem of Divine virtue.

Whenever this book uses the first person, I see that as being God, the Creator, Himself.  While I believe that He is, essentially, addressing every person who will listen, I find it best to consider that He is addressing me, and that I need to strive to take each passage to heart.  The second passage of that book says:

2. O SON OF SPIRIT!
The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes.

There is much to be learned from this (and any) passage, but some of what I see from it is a statement of the principle that each of us must investigate the truth of things for ourselves, and should not accept (nor reject) other people’s interpretations of scriptures or of the world without looking at them ourselves.  I also see in that sentence, “Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be,” that I am responsible for how I am, not for how other people are.  I am not in favor of telling other people how to live their lives, or pointing out other people’s faults, sins, or errors of morality.  (On the other hand, I do care about people, and want the best for them, so I have been known to mention to others when I am fairly certain that their observable actions may have palpably bad outcomes.)

‘Abdu’l Baha has told us to look only at a person’s good qualities and to overlook the bad ones. I believe that our expectations of others, and our perceptions of who they are as individuals can effect those we interact with in subtle ways.  So, if one person perceives another as a liar, for example, that other person is more likely to lie to the first person.  On the other hand, if one person sees another as a creative, kind, and caring person (as in a typical love story), the other is more likely to manifest those qualities.  “Your love makes me a better person” is more than a compliment, it is often an exclamation of wonderment about a real, if mysterious, phenomenon.  I want to have a positive influence on others, so what can I do?

Each person has many discernible qualities, some good, some bad.  So, I want to overlook the bad, and see the good.  But what about a stranger I pass in the street?  In a two kilometer walk through town, I might pass a hundred strangers going the other way.   I thinks of a person’s good qualities as manifestations of God’s light within their soul.  The Hidden Words has this passage:

11. O SON OF BEING!
Thou art My lamp and My light is in thee. Get thou from it thy radiance and seek none other than Me. For I have created thee rich and have bountifully shed My favor upon thee.

So, what I can do - what I try to do and pray for assistance to do - is to see God’s Light in every stranger that I pass, and in each friend that I make, and in people who begin to annoy me, and even in those who seem to wish me harm.  For me, this is what defines other people, and what, in the end, defines me.  In this, I think, I am also obeying Christ’s directive to love my neighbor and my enemy.  Whether you are Christian, Baha’i, Buddhist, Muslim, agnostic, or atheist, can you really say there is any harm in this?

Departing for Africa on August 3rd

As I write this on July 27th, I note that one week from now we will be on a plane headed for Amsterdam, from whence we will proceed to Kigali in Rwanda.  A few weeks ago we moved from our garden apartment to a room in the house of a friend.  Most of our stuff is gone, and we are near to completing the process of winnowing our possessions to what we will be packing. 

While it seems, from one perspective, that we are moving to another continent with much less "stuff" than we have had in the past, I am reminded of the many refuges that have fled from one country to another with no more than they can carry on their backs.  Some of what we will be bringing could be classified as "tools for service," including text books, computers, pens and pencils, and the like, but most are things for our own use, including clothing (how many outfits does one really need?), some things for the kitchen (we hear that a good set of kitchen knives is hard to come by) and a year's supply of our vitamins, prescriptions, and toiletries (also hard to obtain in Rwanda.) There is a Yahoo Group for the participants in the health project for which Anne will be working, and the posts therein include lists of "things I wish I had brought," and, "things I am glad I brought." Some of the items listed seem to be mere personal preference, but others have caused us to take notice and plan to make room.  I don't recall any list of "things I should have left behind!" 

In the last several weeks we have undergone other transformations besides the reduction in our material possessions.  Some have been occurring in our relationships:  both between Anne and me and between each of us and the rest of reality.  We have been working on being more unified through improved communication, greater patience, and more practice at teamwork.  I have particularly become aware of the times when I have a choice of how to respond to situations: either with a "knee jerk" emotional response, or with a more detached and rational response.  (The latter usually has a better outcome, while the former is more likely when I have not been on stage for a long time.  Theater of some sort is definitely on my list of things to do in Rwanda.) 

We have said many farewells, and are grateful for so many good friends and close family.  Soon, we will have new friends and a new Baha'i family in a whole new part of the world.