The Buddha’s explanation as to ‘why’ suffering and dissatisfaction exist within the human mind and the material environment is as good an explanation as any other theory found in Social Science, Psychology or Psychiatry. Past and present lives, when viewed genetically and collectively then take on a new scientific meaning when detached from the dogma of religiously motivated individualism – a mistaken mind-set which perfectly mirrors the Bourgeois ideal state of unbridled ‘individualism’ defined as being the ‘perfect’ (and preferred) mode of predatory capitalism! Of course, from a dialectical position, what we experience today will inevitably dictate how material life will unfold in the future. This intprets the past, present and future existences as taught by the Buddha as coinciding with the past from which the present as emerged – and the ‘future’ into which the present will ‘develop’. Indeed, outside of the superstitious meaning often encouraged amongst the Buddhist laity – it is an established fact that the Theravada Sangha of ordained monks and nuns discuss past, present and future lives in exactly this manner (Abhidhamma) – clarify this issue further by specify the ‘past’ life equals the past moment, the ‘present’ life equals the present moment, and the ‘future’ life equals the life yet to come. Around two to three-thousand years ago, when very few people could read and write, the ordained Buddhist monastic seemed a world apart from the average lay-person. There was good reason for this separation which probably does apply to contemporary life in all but the materially poorest of places. Whatever the situation, the agency of theistic ‘faith’ should NOT replace materially-derived ‘wisdom’. Of course, where literacy is unknown, then faith tends to be the strongest. Ancient India was both poor and illiterate and so the Buddha’s Enlightenment offered a strand of awareness which required the open rejection of ordinary existence. This was, in effect, the rejection of religious-based ‘faith’ – and yet amongst the ignorant masses – ‘faith’ continued to function as a very powerful force and still does. This misinterpretation is encouraged in the West as the theistic religions that have historically dominated these countries have been ‘faith’ based. This is why Buddhism in the West is falsely presented as just another version of the Judeo-Christian religion – when it is clearly (dialectically) far superior to these theistic paths. The philosophy of ancient India, particularly that found within Buddhist ideology, intersects perfectly with the thinking that undermines modern science. India, even before ancient Greece, is well-known to have developed a system of material interpretation of reality. The Buddha seems to have developed his system of interpreting reality from within this system of understanding and explaining existence. The Buddha, whilst experiencing material reality, purified his perceptual understanding so that he realised the ‘essence’ of the human conscious ability – which is used to ‘sense’ the world through the six-senses that comprise the inner and outer body and the physical environment within which it exists. Worshipping the Buddha as a ‘God’ – or continuing to worship the ‘polytheism’ of India – was to miss the dialectical point that the Buddha was making. Perceiving the ‘essence’ of perception is an interesting challenge.
0 Comments
As a political commissar, one of my main tasks is to assist existing religious practitioners and institutes to ‘align’ their ideology with that of Marxist-Leninism. This is not a ‘choice’ but rather a ‘necessity’. The reality is that millions of people follow a religion of some type, and given that religion is not ‘out-lawed’ in a Socialist Society – but rather ‘guaranteed’ - it is important that the two ideologies understand one another and know how to constructively interact. This process is already far advanced within the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and North Korea (DPRK), etc, but is still not understood as a concept amongst many areas of Western Marxist thinking. One thing is certain – Marxist-Leninism does not ‘out-law’ or ‘oppress’’ religion in any way, but rather shifts the place within society within which religions operate. Religion is moved from the ‘public’ to the ‘private sphere for its own protection and security. Religious institutions are shifted out of the political arena and will play no further role in that direction (as the Communist Party develops society through the use of modern science). As religion was founded around the principle of finding existential ‘freedom’ within (or outside of) society, it has no place interfering in the political process. As such, by relocating it into the ‘private’ sphere it may reassert its speciality of providing a vehicle for individual ‘freedom’ from whatever issue or reality it deems responsible for human suffering. In reality, this places religion in a much stronger traditional setting and encourages freedom of worship and tolerance of difference. As no single religion is permitted to ‘dominate’ society (or any other religion), existing in the ‘private’ sphere is a new position of ‘empowerment’ for the religiously minded. As Western religions are in bed with the forces of predatory capitalism, these people resent any attempt at interfering with the positioning of religion within society. From this profit-seeking perspective, moving religion from the ‘public’ to the ‘private’ sphere is deliberately interpreted as ‘oppressive’ - because these people equate ‘religion’ with material ‘profit-seeking’ here on Earth! None of this matters, of course, but Marxist-Leninists must be aware of the process of administering religion within a Socialist society.
For Marx religion is like a fix of opium designed to take the minds (and bodies) of the collective working-class off of the daily suffering implicit within the life of a capitalist society! Whilst for Lenin, religion of any sort is nothing but a ‘fog’ which distorts the collective thinking of the working-class. Furthermore, Marx exposes the underlying philosophical premise of any form of theism as being the product of ‘inverted’ thought processes, or to put it another way, a body of knowledge built upon a foundation of illogical thinking and incorrect conclusions. Marx explains that the idea of an ‘all-knowing’ God is nothing but a ‘thought’ in the human mind – a product of wishful thinking and imagination – which is then mistaken as existing ‘independently’ somewhere ‘out there’ in the universe. This argument is as powerful as it is simplistic and straightforward. For Marx, the vast body of theological literature does not matter – as it is all premised upon a false understanding of reality that relies upon ‘blind faith’ to exist and continue to exist. This is where religion receives its greatest support, as ‘faith’ does not require logical though or correct scientific scrutiny to ‘exist’ and ‘function’ throughout society. The Church Authorities are political entities that support the predatory capitalist system, and they sustain this influence (regardless of its obvious ‘corruption’) through the propagation of the agency of ‘faith’. Just as the Medieval Church gained its political power by aligning itself with the imperial Roman apparatus – modern Christianity has been developed by the bourgeoisie to represents its own best class interests – and grew-out of the process of industrialisation over the last four-years or so. Modern Christianity, therefore, exists as a statement of class dominance by the bourgeoisie which masquerades as a vehicle for personal development and deliverance. By transferring ‘religion’ from the ‘public’ to the ‘private’ sphere – as Marx and Lenin agree – the power-mongering of its modern priesthood is dismantled and disempowered. Religious doctrine is then replaced into a position of its founding – where it becomes a vehicle for self-cultivation with NO political ambitions or political power. An argument can be made that by placing religion into the ‘private’ sphere – religion is being returned to its ‘genuine’ state and purpose of being a vehicle for ‘inner’ development. This private-undertaking should be the only ‘lawful’ function that religious possesses. The ideology of Marxist-Leninism suggests that as times unfolds throughout a ‘Socialist’ society (which sees the working-class seizing control of the means of production) - it is believed that the ‘impulse’ toward religion will eventually die-out quite naturally as society is transformed from one of exploitation’ to that of ‘collective co-operation' - from ‘daily suffering’ to ‘daily collective and personal empowerment’! As the outward aspect of social organisation becomes ‘classless’, ‘just’, ‘productive’ and ‘equalitarian’, etc, the ‘inner’ health and vibrancy of the human-condition will becomes so ‘purified’, ‘positive’ and ‘progressive’ that there will no longer appear the impulse for the need for religion to arise as a psychological, emotional and physical habit. Therefore, Marxist-Leninist ideology offers a critique of religion that is so devastating to the Bourgeois Church that its power-brokers would rather support the ideology of ‘fascism’ and declare Marxism to be ‘evil’ than honestly and truthfully face the allegations levelled by Marx and striving to work with its conclusions rather than propagandising against it. Religion, if handled the right-way, can be useful for the development of a Socialist society, with any Socialist government possessing the moral responsibility of ‘integrating’ religionists into a new Socialist world-order with as little friction as possible. ACW (15.4.2021)
|
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles PhD - Political Commissar and BMA (UK) Historian & Researcher. Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|