September 1, 2023
Principle 9. Liberty. Week 1
“When You Harm Others You Remain Enchained, But If You Do Not Harm Anyone You May Freely Do Whatever You Want”.
Last time: Learning, Contemplation and Doing
This time: A Radical Proposal (and a footnote*).
This Week:
This week we’ll be taking a first look at this principle trying to understand its general structure and scope. In the coming weeks we’ll look at how we applied, or could have applied, this principle in the past, how we apply this principle in the present moment, and how we might apply it in the future.
General Considerations and Personal Reflections:
These are personal reflections. I offer them in the spirit of dialogue and exchange, and look forward to hearing your thoughts about, and experiences with, this principle.
As I have said before, I find this principle astoundingly audacious. I love how, with just a few words, it challenges me not only to rethink my ideas about morality and ethics, but also my relationship to others, the world, and myself. Another thing I find exciting about it, is how it implicitly raises all these issues about the principles themselves, their purpose, how to use them, etc. Even reading it in the simplest terms that’s a lot of stuff — on top of the practical wisdom it offers.
One of the first things we might notice is that this principle starts off telling us that we are “enchained” and that making problems for other people leaves us in that situation. That is, treating others badly somehow blocks or impedes one’s liberating oneself — a goal and principle value of this principle, and Silo’s teaching overall.
The principle then makes a radical proposal, arguably the most revolutionary one possible. It disregards all the conventional moral codes, all the ‘shoulds’, and ‘should nots’, all the ‘musts’ and ‘must nots’ and instead it says we are free to do whatever, given one condition, that we are not harming anyone.
I know people who I generally consider wise but who tell me the principle doesn’t actually mean that we can do whatever we want. They feel it has limitations that just aren’t spelled out. Sorry guys, for my part I don’t see it that way. I understand this principle quite literally — don’t harm people and do what you like. (Period). But that’s me. The principle of free interpretation tells us “let 100 flowers bloom” (as someone who hurt many, many people once said).*
Of course, there are nuances, and of course now we are left trying to figure out things like: what it means to harm someone, where self-harm fits in, and so on. Like with the other principles this one doesn’t provide any pat answers at all, rather it indicates a certain direction of thought, feeling and action. By taking the other principles into account, meditating on our accumulated experience, and clarifying our registers we can learn to turn to ourselves for those answers. What a great lesson that would be to learn!
A Tale to Tell:
Here’s a familiar story that, from a probably unexpected direction, casts some light on this teaching of radical freedom.
Jesus said, “Do not judge so you will not be judged. Because by the judgment you judge in the same way you will be judged and by the measurement with which you measure so will you be measured.”
In this way he showed that the harm done to one’s neighbour is also harm for the one who has done it.
It happened that Jesus was sitting and eating in the company of publicans and sinners, because there were many among his followers. His enemies seeing this said to followers, “How is it that your master eats and drinks with such people.” Hearing this Jesus told them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor but the one who is ill.”
One Sabbath evening as they passed through a field his disciples picked some of the heads of grain. His enemies said to them, “why do you do what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath.” Jesus said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man. Man was not made for the Sabbath.” He explained many things and he said to them, “Go, but first learn what the holy scriptures mean when they tell us: ‘It is Mercy I desire not sacrifice’.”
*And here’s that footnote:
This was actually said by the Chinese Communist Party Chairman Mao Zedong, “The policy of letting a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend is designed to promote the flourishing of the arts and the progress of science”.
He should have taken his own advice instead of stomping out any signs of diversity of opinion.
Worth Repeating:
We are trying to change or strengthen our mental direction. We want to move from a situation of internal conflict to one of internal unity, i.e. agreement between what we think, what we feel, and what we do.
Remember:
I want to increasingly move toward a situation where I’m not at war with myself, where I can tap into the vital energy to face life’s daily challenges, and where I face the uncertain future joyously.
Coming up:
Next week we’ll continue our considerations of the principle of liberty focusing on how it applied to past situations.
These notes have been posted on our Facebook page (Community of Silo’s Message Toronto Annex), sent to our email list, and are also on my webpage at www.dzuckerbrot.com
Note:
Illustration of the principles Rafael Edwards.
Story of the Man on the Street from Mani in Berlin.
And How Not To Look For The Roots of A Conflict, a 1942 cartoon version of last month's joke by Bud Fisher!
