The Big Question

Dear Reader,

It is very apparent that the world is divided into so many compartments of thought, so the idea of attaining solutions that can gain common consensus seems to be a distant ideal. All we have to do is to look at what has happened in the British Parliament over Brexit to be able to accept that perspective!

But we do know that the attempted "common solution" of capitalism and material progress has been found very wanting. In fact, by itself, it has failed.

But maybe if we can imbue such a creed with acceptable human values then perhaps we can make progress? The Guardian newspaper wrote, in 2010:

Many thinkers have identified common strands in systems of thought and religions through the ages. In 1945 Aldous Huxley wrote of a perennial philosophy "that recognises a divine reality substantial to the world of things and lives and minds; the psychology that finds in the soul something similar to, or even identical with, divine reality; the ethic that places man's final end in the knowledge of the immanent and transcendent ground of all being". He said that it could be found in both "traditional lore" and the "higher religions", in every era.

The Guardian went on: 

 Was Huxley right? Is there an eternal truth, that we keep on discovering – whether it's a "divine reality" or something better formulated in another way? And if so, what is its nature – is it outside us? Is it simply an aspect of the way our brains are wired?

I contend that whatever we may think about the notion of a Perennial Philosophy, the lines of concern that Huxley wrote on do ring true to my way of thinking. I have come to reject the notion that there is any "right religion" (that one is 'better' than another) but have developed the view that the basis of all religious/spiritual paths is the same, as they depend on the common theme of Love to gain success.  Indeed, how otherwise was the Universe created and through what means is the Universe maintained?

So perhaps rather than talk of grand titles like 'Perennial Philosophy', we should simply talk about 'Love', and what Love would do in attempting to solve the problems that exist, and which will persist if they are not addressed. And I would suggest that we need to address these issues before matters become worse, as surely they are.

Surely we can reconcile to the notion of 'Love' being a commonly understood phenomenon? If not, why not? Or is Love a threat to us, that it implies selflessness? The answer lies with you ... and you ... and you ... and me. But it is a question we need to address.

Thank you for reading this