Month: February 2015

Humanity stands exposed beneath the shadow of our sense of belonging.

Killings, particularly those of children, carried out intentionally and with disregard for collateral damage, serve as stark indicators of regression to primal instincts, shedding the veneer of civilization that cloaks us.

Today, instead of adorning humanity with the garments of civilization, our allegiance to belonging groups strips away the true essence of being human.

Religions provided us with spiritual attire and adorned us with jewels of pride, aiding our evolution beyond mere groups or nations. Yet, we remain ensnared in the politics of belonging.

We’ve transitioned from packs to clans, races to nations, and religions, but now it’s time to take the next leap—a leap into humanity as a unified entity, while still honoring individual human rights. Ultimately, our collective desire for justice, whether at the individual or national level, unites us. Our pursuit of equality has led to acceptance of our differences and coexistence in Western societies—a model that can be replicated globally.

What qualifies us as human beings? Are we truly superior to chimps or baboons?

Compassion, sacrifice, forgiveness, and love adorn us like jewels. Stripped of these, we’re left as mere animals. True humanity isn’t about subscribing to a particular path to God; it’s about practicing spirituality and acknowledging the limitations of our knowledge. Killing in the name of righteousness stems not from spiritual enlightenment but from ego.

Murder is murder, whether committed for personal gain or in service of a group, nation, or religion. Becoming a hero in your group by taking a life is a spiritual offense—a theft of love from the victim’s family and humanity at large.

Self-defense and vengeance are feeble justifications for perpetrating spiritual crimes in the name of belonging.

Understanding oneself and one’s sense of belonging can help individuals discern the politics that pervade their lives, enabling them to pursue justice for themselves and others.

When individuals are taught to perceive themselves as different or superior, it’s the ego at play—a byproduct of belonging to a specific group.

As long as groups prioritize collective interests over individual autonomy and responsibility, wars and spiritual transgressions will persist, regardless of religious teachings.

Embracing individuality and assuming the role of CEO of one’s life can empower individuals to transcend group boundaries and become part of the broader human fabric.

Religions have historically steered individuals away from their groups to foster belief and security within defined boundaries. Today, nations follow suit, inevitably leading to conflict. Group politics incite clashes on a larger scale, perpetuating the same problems.

By transcending the political boundaries delineated by communities, nations, or religions, humanity can unite with spirituality and embrace the collective human experience. Politically dividing the globe impedes peace, as population growth fuels territorial disputes.

The path to heaven may be one thing, but living a peaceful life on Earth is another. Ask the victims of violence which they prefer—I choose peace, particularly inner peace, over any semblance of hell or heaven. I’ll keep my spiritual hijab on, regardless of belonging to any specific group, and advocate the same for all. Strive to reach your potential before passionately pursuing knowledge. If you’re learning something new every day, you’re far from a finished product.

There isn’t any facet of human knowledge immune to the need for updates as we progress; whether it’s religion or a national constitution, nothing should remain stagnant. Over time, we must adapt to life’s changes—consider how recently concepts like computers and the Internet emerged, now nearly indispensable for social interaction. From scientific advancements to technological innovations to sociological shifts to medical breakthroughs, every field continuously evolves to meet societal needs, or rather, humanity’s needs.

The marvel of a cellphone exemplifies this evolution—consider its multifaceted utility. Our aircraft transport hundreds with autopilot technology; cars park themselves and soon may drive autonomously. We’ve decoded the genetic blueprint, engineered ships to navigate icy waters, and forecast weather patterns, among countless other feats.

Socially, strides toward equality and human rights counteract racism and prejudice, from gender parity to sexual liberation. Yet, religion often lags in adapting to contemporary contexts due to entrenched biases from religious teachings.

If we annually unveil newer models of inventions, why can’t our religious understanding also adapt to modern exigencies?

The answer lies in the power dynamic: man is governed by religion, not vice versa. This underscores that religious systems are fundamentally political—a far cry from spirituality.

Our minds resemble oceans, absorbing information ceaselessly from birth. As we mature, we navigate from simple arithmetic to grappling with existential concepts like life and spirituality. Unlike straightforward arithmetic, spirituality isn’t binary—it’s akin to composing an individual’s unique symphony, varied for each. Yet, our limited understanding leads to assumptions, often proven erroneous. Despite evidence, individuals and groups vehemently defend their assumptions, sometimes to the point of violence.

To me, spirituality isn’t about mere prayers but tangible assistance to those in need. Helping humanity or other beings is akin to prayer—fear-driven prayers devoid of tangible aid hold no value, for we’re all interconnected facets of the divine.

Spirituality encompasses humanity at large and individual experiences, not exclusive to any group. Sacrifice and prayer must yield to practical assistance for those in need. Prioritizing prayer over aiding others signifies a disconnect between religious obligations and spirituality.

There’s no selective afterlife; prioritizing group allegiance over empathy and compassion is a political allegiance to one’s religion.

As an individual, you’re the CEO of your life—prioritize spirituality over religious dogma.

Regardless of our evolution, we still instinctively try to kill a fly if it buzzes around our food. Where one should draw the line is highly individual. I believe that when it comes to safety and survival, a person has the right to protect themselves and their loved ones.

We have passed our knowledge to new generations, yet we come from generations who ate food despite flies being a part of life. Now, we know the harm flies can bring, so we react strongly to ensure cleanliness.

Some extremists go so far as to avoid killing anything, even if there is a threat to themselves or their children. Personally, I have not completely evolved in that way, but I am willing to change as needed. I don’t believe in limiting my knowledge.

I would not fast for religious purposes if I had diabetes that could cause dangerously low blood sugar levels, potentially leading to a coma or death. As a human being, survival is my first duty; everything else comes second. Hypothetically or in reality, every social duty depends on being alive and able. If someone has physical difficulties, they should amend the rules accordingly.

Firstly, I believe God would not put someone in a situation where they suffer and die while following religious rules. Secondly, I understand that fasting or prayer involves some sacrifice, so I would seek alternative ways to fulfill that obligation. All laws, orders, and religious beliefs in human societies are products of a full stomach. If you are starving to death, your duty is to alter the rules and survive first.

If someone is starving in a society that enforces strict rules, then that society has not fulfilled its responsibility. For people to follow the rules, they must have enough to eat. I am not a socialist, but I believe in equal responsibility for everyone, whether it’s the individual or society collectively.