Thursday, October 20, 2011

Reality

If this is your first time viewing my writing - please begin with the  post titled "the crazy lady's emporium" as it serves as an introduction to this site    

 “Reality is an illusion of time” – I wrote that 40 years ago- sheesh!  It is limited in a number of ways. If I’d written “Reality is an illusion of time and perception” it would still have been limited.  If, as the cliché goes, “Time changes all things” then, were they ever truly “real”? Primarily, it was based on a definition of “reality” according to sensory perceptions.  What we deem to be “real” depends upon our definition of the word and the perceptions which precede it. Reality, in those terms, is similar in many ways for all – and also different.  It’s like sola scriptura.  We share the same Bible, but each of us may interpret it in different ways – hence different conclusions abound.  Yet we use the term “real” as though it is something concrete and non-negotiable; and we further confuse the issue by substituting another word, “true”, as having the same meaning.  Yet the very things which we can “prove” to be real, are often the most deceptive in that they are also the most transitory. So, something may seem to be real, but not be lasting, can the same be said for what is true?  I think if we limit ourselves to a “reality” based solely upon the receptivity of our senses and our ability to measure them, we are limiting ourselves in an adverse way.  Does “truth” change depending upon a random set of variables?  If it doesn’t change, then what exactly can we call “true”, or “real”?  Yes, it is a question of semantics, but those words affect our lives in a profound way. 

     Objects which we create have only a period of time before they no longer exist.  Nature, the cosmos, plant and animal life, etc., are only “real” and provable for a varying amount of time.  Can we call anything that is transitory “real”?  How can we trust our senses and perceptions to formulate the definition of “reality”? Is reality connected to “Truth”, and if so, in what way?  If we can refine our perception of what is real or true, can we draw nearer to God? 

     Let’s say God is Truth.  If Truth is an absolute, can it vary in any way?  If God is Truth then He is the most “real” part of the universe, of our reality. Can anything transitory or finite be called “true”?  Each of us experiences the world through a lens.  It is the formulation of thought in our own minds and this lens “colors” our perception of everything and everyone we come in contact with.  It even colors our perception of the past and the future.  We are all “Looking” at the same reality, but each of us “sees” it differently based upon the “lens” we view it through.  How do we know whose lens provides the truest perception of reality?  Some are obviously flawed and we can tell…like the person who views stealing as a justifiable act based upon self-gratification.  There are an unimaginable number of lenses through which we may view any given situation.  No wonder the world lacks unity.  I’m interested in attempting to view “reality” or “Truth” or God, through a lens that is not skewed by my own personal experience, limitations, and desires.  For me, there is only one lens that I trust to attain that goal, and it is through the eyes and heart of Christ.  Perfecting that lens is for me, the journey of a lifetime.  But, it is a place to start and to return to when I get lost along the way. 

        The older I get, the more often I see the paradoxical nature of our existence.  Reality is just another example.  That which seems real, is transitory, that which seems unreal is part of an eternal truth.  Suffering is another example.  It seems life destroying, hurtful, painful and it is, and yet, it is a path by which we become, in many instances, more holy, more loving, less selfish.  Christ died – a temporal reality, to bring eternal life – a great paradox, perhaps the paradox.  Until I flipped the binoculars that I viewed this life through, I could not see with any clarity.  I am still adjusting the lens, but I know that I am nearer to Truth today than ever before.

   This process of discerning the differences between temporal reality and eternal truth is important because I desire the actions of my life to contribute to both.  Yes, I must sustain the temporal life I live and share with others, but I must not make that the sole thrust of all my actions.  If I were to simply react to each “real” situation or opportunity, I would be missing something more precious and important.  It is the eternal “reality” that matters most.  And the heart or “nous” is the entrance to that realm.  In the end, all that really matters about my life is how well I have loved God, other human beings and His creation.  All of the day-to-day things that I do, i.e. feeding my cats, spending time and caring for others, cleaning the toilets, etc. all are directed toward that goal.  I hope that through these actions – no matter how humble or mundane, I am transforming the temporal reality into something more “real” and therefor eternal; and though the remembrance of these things I do may pass, their consequences and value will not.

4 comments:

  1. Thanks for sharing those thoughts! I will try to render said thoughts justice by commenting with equal seriousness. I am reminded of a compass needle that points north everywhere you are at unless you are actually at the north pole, at which time it just goes haywire. If you take the verses about "what you do for the least of these you do for me" and put it with the verses that Jesus says combine the entire Judeo-Christian doctrine (love God completely and humanity selflessly), one could argue that the rule of reciprocity sums it up quite simply. This rule of reciprocity is shared by all major religions and in my mind could be considered the "true north" of human morality. But the closer you get to the source of the doctrine, it just goes haywire. Maybe because once you are on the "moral ground" there is nothing else to look for that can be found (at least in this plane of reality/understanding). Saint Thomas More suggested in the book Utopia that maybe God made people believe different things because he wanted to be worshipped in different ways. That makes sense, true? or not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Doug,
      I tried to respond directly in this space and it wouldn't accept it. Apparently, I'm too long-winded - so I'll reply as a new post!

      Delete
    2. In response to God ‘making’ people believe different things because He wants to be worshipped in different ways – I think you might have a difficult time if you want to prove, rationally or logically that God makes man do anything. It would also be difficult to follow a stream of logic that supports the idea that burning a child over an altar, or cutting a man’s heart out while he is still alive is as pleasing to Him as singing praises and striving to be a more loving person. So I would have to say, “No, I don’t believe that Thomas More’s theory is correct.

      Delete
  2. Heyna, Can you make the RSS feed tool available (I can help), so I can see your new posts on my igoogle page? My emails are getting junked or something. I want to know each day, if you've updated. :) I have read some of those poems. I have this idea about making my poetry blog (see here:http://handmaiden4peace.blogspot.com/ interactive. Like Ted Kooser's website. Josh F suggested those. So, do you want to collaborate? Oh, and your poetry gets this vote of confidence from me:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qDtHdloK44

    ReplyDelete