Agnostism & The Dalai Lama
Much like an awkward conversation with extended family at a German restaurant turning to the topic of world war history I recently found myself discussing religion and philosophy at the Dalai Lama’s recent appearance. I found myself working at a gate with a fascinating fellow named Stephen who seemed to know just about everything about religion and philosophy and held his own in the realm of political theory, the only topic of conversation he appeared lacking in was Europe. Suffice to say it was one of the most intellectually stimulating conversations I’ve had in quite some time.
For example I discovered I’m agnostic. It turns out I had an oversimplified definition of the word, I thought it essentially boiled down to ‘undecided’ but it turns out the proper definition matches my beliefs almost perfectly.
What are my beliefs? Let’s look at it like a philosophical theory.
Assume there is a higher being be it God, Allah, Adam Smith, whoever. Now if this supreme being or beings oversaw your afterlife then your relationship with this being should be the most important thing because nothing in your life can measure up to eternity.
Still with me?
Alright. So God and your relationship with Him or Her is the most important thing in your life. Why would I let someone else tell me how to conduct those affairs?
What’s more, who am I to pick the correct religion or God? I’m not smart enough.
Where does that leave me?
Well the way I look at it I know right from wrong and the benefits and inherent goodness in choosing compassion over selfishness so I’ll just plan to be the best person I know how to be and surely no deity will find fault with that. Assuming I don’t getting smote for drinking caffeine or eating pig.
The proper definition of agnostic, according to Stephen, is “someone who does not believe that they can know God“. It acknowledges that there is a greater power but it’s not possible to know it beyond maybe observing and appreciating it’s effects.
He also had this great metaphor for the catholic church. Basically it’s a football metaphor but I won’t hold that against it. It goes that God gave Jesus the football. When Jesus was tackled by the Romans (ie on the cross) he tossed the football to Paul who in turn ran with it for awhile and eventually passed it on. The pope currently has the ball.
So I guess then the question is was the football always passed intentionally or was there some tackling or fumbling involved? Or did someone switch balls?
Also at the event a security guy, a Buddhist, was touched, literally, by the Dalai Lama. It had quite a profound impact on him and when talking to him afterwards I realized I had nothing I could relate that to.
