That all beings are great and all are part of and responsible to the whole is a world view based on the concept of Reciprocity and one which is fundamental to the Haudenosaunee of North America.
Haudenosaunee (meaning People of the Longhouse and first called Iroquois by 15th and 16th century European French and continued by non-native speakers) believe this world view is core to the survival of the Universe.
For over five centuries, Haudenosaunee have offered to help the non-native peoples with whom they share North America find the way to reach beyond restraints of selfishness and ignorance, overcome the choke-hold of fear, dismantle the artificiality of their material society, and to live freely with dignity and responsibility.
For over five centuries, non-native peoples of North America have refused the offer.
It is, however, important to note that during the early formation of the United States some members of America’s ‘Founding Fathers’ – most notably Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson – did draw on theories of governance from the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, the oldest living participatory democracy on planet Earth.
Now struggling desperately to find a path that will lead them toward a successful advance forward and to internal peace and prosperity, the people of the United States seem ready to embark on yet another journey; but this journey is one which will take the nation down the road to ruin.
Is it too late for the United States to change directions, to save itself from itself?
Some say yes. They say the United States has reached the point of no return. The United States, they say, seems determined to race down the path of ruination. Elected leaders, community leaders, spiritual leaders, and leaders of commerce, have openly chosen bigotry, division, greed, and violence, as principles of motivation to ensure the results of that race.
Unfortunately, ‘the people’ of the United States are very much divided: some want to follow these leaders of ruin, yet others still believe it is not too late to make the necessary change of direction.
I am of the belief that it is not too late. But the journey, obviously, must take a different path. All we have to do is look and listen. The Universe offers its own path to a successful advance forward; to survival and freedom.
With that in mind, consider first the following:
The Universe is Whole; everything in it is Parts. The Whole, therefore, is only as strong as its Parts. Each of the Parts, then, must be as strong as the Whole.
This is not to suggest that the Whole is made up of alike Parts, but all Parts are of equal importance. Each of the Parts, no matter their size or position in relation to the Whole, have a particular place and function upon which the very survival of the Whole depends; the dysfunction of any member will ultimately result in the disintegration of the Whole.
It is, therefor, the collective responsibility of the Whole to insure the integrity of itself; not, however, at the expense of the integrity of any individual Part.
Completeness is maintained, and survives, only in the exemplary relationship of the collective body with its Universe, not as the dictates of some individuals or sanctified documentation.
This view of how the world works is not learned by following the dictates of so-called ‘political’ leaders or falsely sanctified documents such as bibles, scriptures or constitutions. The Universe, the Whole, provides its own lessons. All we, the Parts, have to do is what indigenous peoples have done for many thousands of years: look around.
A reciprocal relationship with the Universe is lived within a concept of ‘natural laws’. Used as a how to book, Universal relationships provide each of us with a set of moral guides and the strength to live responsibly within the whole of our society. A moral consciousness realised through first-hand experience with natural law leads us away from feelings of helplessness that today plagues our society, to a feeling of triumph and dignity.
The basic stages through which such realisation must transcend are found in the processes of the changing seasons.
For example:
Summer – filled with activity: gathering information; doing the research; becoming familiar with the process.
Fall – paring back: sifting through the shoulds and should nots; ridding oneself of the excuses; simplifying; accepting only the essentials of life; final preparation.
Winter – the challenge: facing one’s environment, on its own terms; gaining control of reality; reaching within one’s own darkness and having the courage to face the truth.
Spring – rebirth: shedding artificiality; freedom from the slavery of excessiveness; realisation of one’s own strength; a sense of fulfillment; purification!
It is thus, upon the completion of this journey, that an individual might take her or his place among the community – with integrity, dignity, and the courage to face the responsibilities. It is the strength gained from the realisation that one can survive by relying on one’s imagination that allows for a sense of pride and positiveness. It is with this renewed sense of individuality that one may march to the freedom of natural laws.
Opposition to the world view of Reciprocity and the concept of natural laws declares that the claims of the Whole, in a ‘civilised society’, might demand greater consideration than any individual Part. Natural laws and personal justice must take a backseat to the utilitarian principle of social expediency. No matter at what expense, the integrity of a civilised Whole – in and of itself – demands a higher position.
If left at that, how then is that society to survive? If, at every conflict between the natural rights of Man and the indomitable order of society – which is controlled by society’s law, the verdict must come in favor of the supposed higher ethic of civilised society, and this at the expense, each time, of a little more individual integrity, how long will it be before the system, with its expedient needs, made up of all these disfigured Parts, loses its integrity and begins to disintegrate, eventually ceasing to be free, to exist?
A utilitarian principle of social expediency, which is based on man-made law – falsely sanctified ornamentation – suggests that society, then, must operate on an either/or basis. Either follow the dictates of an expedient social code, or lay no claim to place or position (within it).
Ironically, this conflict, having endless examples of failure, need not even exist. It prevails only because most have abdicated their right to exist on this Planet. In other words, by accepting the responsibility of our relationship in this Universe, the battle of rights would cease to be fought.
By truly understanding the reciprocal nature of our being, we rise above the concept of utilitarian conflict. The need just isn’t there.
Loyalty of the individual is natural to a moral code interpreted by the consciousness of the genuine Whole – itself based on the exemplary behaviour of the individual Parts.
The conflict of rights, degrading to the human spirit as is evident throughout our society, and marked by the defilement of everything that is decent, enslaves and brutalises humankind and tears at the very foundation of freedom.
Conflict of any kind that places Man at war with the Universe deprives all beings of their rightful place in the authentic Whole. By accepting conflict of rights as the condition of humankind, society is forever controlled by the facade of man’s law, enslaved within the conflict, depriving itself of the completeness of peace and freedom.
The ‘war’, if you will, exacts an unreasonable price and is ultimately paid for in terms of human value.
My annual post, of hope. Usually titled, Looking For Love In All The Wrong Places
