"In the beginning was the Word," according to the Bible. God's words created the universe; He spoke us into being. Words created our world -- literally. Words have power -- to uplift or to tear down -- to inspire or to incite -- to heal or to hurt -- to create or destroy. Words define our reality -- for better or for worse.
In the aftermath of the massacre in Tucson, we hear much debate about the role of words in politics and in society. Those who defensively insist that their use of gun metaphors and violent analogies had nothing to do with a single gunman's mad attack are fooling themselves. And those who hurl accusations and blame at others for their words are failing to recognize that they, too, are guilty of verbal violence. There is plenty of blame to go around.
We all understand the power of words. Words shape our perception of the world; words trigger emotions; words wound; words have consequences. Those who write books and blogs understand the power of words; those who work in advertising and sales know the power of words; those in the media are savvy about the power of words; and political leaders know all-too-well the power of words.
Words call us to action -- to buy things, to vote a certain way, to hate those who are different from us, to eat certain foods and wear specific brands of clothes, and yes, to kill.
America was established by words -- the Declaration of Independence. Our rights and responsibilities are secured by words -- the Constitution. Words commemorate significant events in history -- the Gettysburg Address. Words capture the hopes and dreams of a people -- MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech. We memorize those words; we recite those words; we refer to those words; we call on those words to define who we are and what we stand for as a nation.
Those who pooh-pooh the lethal power of words are forgetting (or ignoring) the horrific results of deadly orators such as Hitler and Mussolini. History is replete with examples of political leaders who used their words to incite hatred, start wars, and lead their people to commit genocide.
Jesus was not the only spiritual leader who taught us how powerful our words are. Five hundred years before Jesus was born, Buddha cautioned his followers:
"Be careful of your thoughts, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful of your words, for your words become your actions. Be careful of your actions, for your actions become your habits. Be careful of your habits, for your habits become your character. Be careful of your character, for your character becomes your destiny."Buddha wasn't just talking about politicians and pundits -- he was talking about all of us. One of Buddha's guidelines on the Eight-fold Path is the concept of Right Speech, the first principle of ethical conduct. Buddha pointed out that "words can break or save lives, make enemies or friends, start war or create peace. He explained the elements of right speech: (1) to abstain from false speech, especially not to tell deliberate lies and not to speak deceitfully, (2) to abstain from slanderous speech and not to use words maliciously against others, (3) to abstain from harsh words that offend or hurt others, and (4) to abstain from idle chatter that lacks purpose or depth."
Is Sarah Palin guilty of verbal violence? Are Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Bill O'Reilly guilty of contributing to a toxic political culture? Is Keith Olbermann culpable for fanning the flames of hate? Does Rachel Maddow contribute to intolerance and anger with her commentary? Does Jon Stewart commit violence when he ridicules public figures? Jesus and Buddha would both tell us that looking for someone to blame for the Tucson massacre will not bring answers -- or healing.
The real question we need to ask is: "How do my words contribute to violence in the world? In what ways do I participate in a social and political culture of intolerance, hate, and/or violence?" For as long as we point fingers of blame at one another, we fail to see our own culpability. "And why behold you the mote that is in your brother's eye, but consider not the beam that is in your own?" the Bible chastises us.
Every time we yell at someone who cuts us off in traffic, we are being verbally violent. Each time we call someone an "idiot" or "moron," we are guilty of wrong speech. If in exasperation we blurt out, "If you do that I'll kill you!" to our spouses, our words are an attack. When we lose our tempers and drop the F-bomb on someone who angers us, that F-bomb really is a bomb. It does damage. Idle threats are not idle -- they are seeds we plant in our psychic and cultural soil -- seeds that take root and later blossom into violent acts. We reap as we sow.
If we want more civil discourse, we must start with ourselves. If we want less violence in our country, we must stop committing violence with our words. Change doesn't start in Washington -- it starts with each and every one of us, where we live and work. Gandhi taught us, "We must be the change we wish to see in the world." And the Christian hymn echoes: "Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me."
BJ Gallagher's new book, "If God Is Your Co-Pilot, Switch Seats" (Hampton Roads) will be published in May.
Follow BJ Gallagher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/BJ_Gallagher
Arizona shooting suspect could face death penalty - U.S. news ...
Parents of Ariz. shooting suspect apologize - Yahoo! News
Five killed in Arizona shooting; suspect flees to R.C., kills ...
Arizona Shooting : Pictures, Videos, Breaking News
RealClearPolitics - Video - Dem Congressman: If Violent Rhetoric ...
Giffords shooting: the sheriff who turned the focus on rightwing ...
Is Violent Rhetoric Behind the Attack on Giffords? - TIME
What is “violent rhetoric� : Lawyers, Guns & Money
ThinkProgress » VIDEO: The Extreme, Violent Rhetoric Of GOP Lawmakers
Violent Rhetoric, Then and Now - Megan McArdle - National - The ...
Or that the "ideology of peace on earth" came only with the teachings of a medieval Italian saint whom you think wouldn't be a Christian today for no specific reason other than you don't like Christianity. He was a Roman Catholic, after all, which had a lot more "trappings" than being a Catholic today, let alone a Christian, which in itself requires no sectarian affiliation.
If you think Buddhism offer you more of something you like, then go for it. Everyone must choose his or her path, and none of them require that you look down on others for choosing differently.
Of course, this is where the Christian apologists begin "explaining" why what he said and did is really OK, and not the same sort of thing you are decrying in your blog. See comments below for examples.
They say this was all part of Jesus' "passion". He cared so much about us and for us, that he got all worked up over injustice, hypocrisy, etc.
But of course, that's what everyone claims when they get all worked up.
The question is: Is getting all worked up the real problem here? The Buddha would say that it is. He thought passion was a root problem, and dispassion (not apathy) was an essential part of the solution.
For Jesus, the scribes and the pharisees were his enemies. For the Buddha, the enemy is ignorance.
Big difference there.
They insisted that God could only be approached through a bureaucratic maze that kept ordinary people from feeling there was any love there, just demands for excruciatingly correct behavior that they would, inevitably, fail again and again. The money lenders were not, necessarily, themselves Pharisees, but they were financial opportunists.
Why should anyone not be passionate in the face of actual, unjust oppression, and not call evil out when they see it? The Buddha often rebuked people who behaved badly in no uncertain terms. In fact, among the many stories about the Buddha, he is portrayed rebuking people "severely."
Jesus isn't the Buddha. Both did say that ignorance was the main reason for many of the evils they decried, but they weren't dispassionate about them, either.
Your weird friend.
There are two sorts of "passion" we're conflating here: One is deep caring, concern for social justice, etc. That's the good sort.
The other is what Buddhism calls "blind passion" - the sort of overwrought emotionalism that leads us to say and do bad things. Buddha said these come from the three root poisons of greed, anger and fear.
I've spent a good deal of time reading and contemplating the life and ministry of both Jesus and the Buddha. My take - based on the documentation available - is that Jesus fell prey to blind passion many times. He was overcome by anger, and even acted that out in a felonious assault in the episode with the money-changers.
This goes far beyond any legitimate act of prophetic rebuke.
And I see that same acting out quality in the portrayal of the godhead in both the Old and New Testament. That's what makes it such a source of confusion, and has given so many "believers" license to commit evil with pious faces.
You just don't get that sort of impression or permission from reading the Buddha's words.
So my take is that Jesus was part way up the mountain, but hadn't yet travelled the distance. That is not to condemn him, but rather to see him clearly, rather than deifying him.
Buddha, OTOH, clearly made it up the mountain entirely. That is not to deify him, either.
What I do believe is that abrahamic texts, which form the basis of the three levantine religions, is just so riddled with toxic material that it causes as least as much havoc as it purports to solve.
Yes, there are wonderful passages about wisdom and compassion - with wonderful words coming out of the mouth of the godhead. But there are also equally horrific passages, with truly horrible words (and deeds) supposedly coming from the same god.
Reading the OT and the Koran, it's totally clear to me where Bin Laden gets his idea of righteous behavior. Reading the OT and the NT, its equally clear where the church fathers and Luther gets their idea of persecuting the Jews - or where countless Christian worthies get their ideas about burning or hanging witches...and on and on.
If there is indeed a godhead - a separate entity that is the first cause of existence - I am sure that these abrahamic texts are a slanderous mispresentation of it, rather than an accurate one.
It is this slanderous representation that I am pointing to, and passionately (in the good sense) speaking against.
I get it that you are judging Jesus on how he showed his passion for justice, and compare his words and reactions to Siddhartha Buddha's. I have to point out that you're comparing apples to oranges -- Siddhartha, so far as I know, did not portray himself with the kind of claim to moral authority that Jesus did, based on Judiac law.
Their situations were vastly different. Siddhartha's life, for example, was never at risk, that I know, of losing his life because of his teachings.
these are profound words you are stating. there is no such thing as the fall but it appears that there was a fall from the grace of the Infinite. that ignorance in humanity the buddha realized. buddha saw the ignorance in humanity jesus saw the original innocence. no I am not a christian or belong to any religion.
Oneness can only manifest variety by the appearance of a "fall". the Infinite expresses its dynamic potential through its creation and manifestation of unique souls. unique souls can only be created though the process from a spark of awareness (ignorance) to gods in the making. ie divine intelligence.
that adam and eve story may be a myth but it is a myth that has some meaning. once we eat from the tree of knowledge we shall be as gods. eating from the tree of knowledge is the evolution of consciousness defined.
who knew not I? in my atheist days I used to make fun of the adam and eve story as a fairy tale or worst. jesus was a hippy and god was right up there with santa claus and the easter bunny.
nothing exists outside of Infinite. nothing can.
A 1,000 years earlier, Solomon knew “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger†(Prov. 15:1). The apostle Paul was largely of the same mind. He said that anger gives the devil a foothold.
Jesus's brother James was convinced that harsh, mean-spirited words did more than cause dissension. In his view, they acted as a barrier between us and God. Consequently, everyone should be quick to listen to others, slow to speak – and slow to become angry. A man's anger, he said, “does not bring about the righteous life that God desires†(James 1:19-20.)
For Paul, that righteous living led to an abundance of fruit from the Spirit resident in us, including peace and patience. One of the chief gifts of being in communion with the Spirit, he felt, was self-control, according to Gal. 5:22-23.
Unfortunately, often that seems to be in short supply these days in political discourse. -- Strangers Home Ministries
Gandhi helped to focus anger towards a political agenda, MLK did the same. Sometimes there is a clear definition of right and wrong. What we do with anger is what matters and the Tea Party is pushing the country in a very dangerous direction. Olbermann, Maddow and Stewart expose the truth most of the time. Somebody needs to expose the endless lies that come from the Republican side.
I think the Buddha would approve of rejecting the lies and propaganda that hurt the poor, the working class, that subject minorities to oppression by the majority, that can even persuade the country to go to war or persuade a psychopath to murder innocent people. The Dalai Lama may provide us with a great example by forgiving the Chinese government but he doesn't have to respect their point of view.
"I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me." (Matthew 10:35-38)
and "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay [them] before me." Luke 19:27
and "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, and sisters, as well as his own life, he can't be my disciple." Luke 14:26
Perhaps Jesus isn't the best example to cite when it comes to how words can kill? Consider all the killing that has been done in his name over the centuries.
Ancient peoples were used to thinking symbolically. They understood words and images as polyvalent-- carrying several levels of meaning. Much more akin to poetry than literal history. "Sword" can mean discernment. Cutting through mere appearances, or cutting off mental habits that obstruct understanding.
That passage in Matthew is followed by that stuff about family. Radically shocking to people whose identity was local tribe and patriarchal clan. Cuts through unreflective behavior and beliefs. Gets at considering neighbor or sister as not limited to relatives, more even than tribe or nation.
Next in Mt is "Those who find their life will lose it, those who lose their life for my sake will find it." The NT Greek word translated as life is psyche. Which is life energy/vitality of nature, what we moderns mean by psychological, and soul. So basic natural vitality is fine for nature-- but not enough for the life of a soul of a human evolving spiritually.
The enemies passage, (related to Mt 25:14,) is from a parable. Following how those who have will be given more, those with little will lose even that. Those who develop soul/psyche will acquire spirit. Those who aren't ruled by spirit come to believe only in materialism.
There is a wonderful book which demonstrated how malleable the translation of "The Lord's Prayer" is, for instance. Once you see that, you realize how malleable the translations of everything in The Bible might be. So, I can't see the words in the Bible as absolutely reflecting exactly what Jesus or anyone at the time might have said. It is more a reflection of what we have handed down and inculcated ourselves with.
American culture is individualistic. Your post is speaking to deaf ears. Last night was a classic example of denial promoted as nationalism and patroitism. Sounded more like a cheer leading session than a reflection on the lives lost and our involvement as a violent culture in those lives being lost. It was a reelection speech and it worked to perfection. The liberals and progressives are tripping over their selves with praise for a great speech.
Jesus and buddha are not well know in america contrary to popular opinion. This nation calls itself a christian nation but has and supports a war machine like no other nation has ever known. The prince of peace is sold as the price of peace.
the meek shall inherit the earth but not until the evolution of consciousness process has done its thing to almost perfection.
It's true that America is at the extreme of individualism. Understanding that means considering the whole arc of western cultural evolution. Starting with Christianity, which had origins in the radical idea that every human had a soul.
In the ancient world, only a few, religious castes and the upper nobility, could go through initiations by which they reached universal consciousness or enlightenment. Others were on a slow path of reincarnation-- if they had souls at all. Most simply returned to earth.
The idea of the equality of souls is powerful. Eventually becoming the idea of individuality. Not being limited to identity with the circumstances of birth. Caste, clan, gender. And also the idea of individual rights. Which has affected the entire modern world.
What if the Fall, separation, were not a mistake? Those enigmatic biblical passages about "you shall be as gods" could be related. A way of saying symbolically that through the evolution of consciousness (becoming deified) we become whole beings. Enabled to care for each other and the planet.
And what if individuality is barely evolved, still rather tenuous? There seems to be a contrast. Between individuals secure in their identities, able to work together. And those whose sense of self is maintained only against something external. They seem selfish because common good is for them loss, and a weakening of personal boundaries.
Difficult to learn to love neighbors. Yet we're all Americans. Let's show compassion, patience, and respect.