The 150 people aboard Germanwings flight 4U9525 sacrificed their lives in order to bring a deeply profound element within our collective psyche to our awareness. It is a psychological prompt that urges us to act on an acute subconscious desire—our “desire for death”—which lurks in the shadows of our much vaunted “desire for life.”
Toward a better understanding of suicide
In the UK, suicide is the biggest killer of men under the age of 50. Male suicides outnumber female suicides by a ratio of nearly 4:1. (78% to 22% in 2013.) The number of men committing suicide in the UK is nearing 5,000 a year—that’s about 13 male suicides every day. Furthermore, this average has been steadily increasing since 2007, in contrast to a significant decrease in female suicides.
Suicide is an everyday phenomenon we seldom examine. We dismissively reason that someone choosing suicide has been subject to a tangled personal dilemma that has little to inform us on how to manage our own life. When a famous person like Robin Williams commits suicide we are less dismissive, but we still don’t look for any deeper meaning that links us to the event. The tendency is to pass off such tragedy as another example of an artistic genius ending their lives in order to end some maniacal obsession with the worthiness of their existence.
We can’t imagine a person’s suicide has anything to tell us about our own Self, because we don’t believe we are all deeply connected to each other.
What are the statistics telling us?
Continue reading “German co-pilot’s suicide points to our shared desire for death (Part 1 of 2)”
Do you fear for the world and its children—in light of the horrendous acts of violence committed by religious fundamentalists?
Have you lost faith in your Faith—in view of the latest and historic abuse carried out by those entrusted with the care of our children?
Why do we create such abhorrent events for ourselves? What makes us perpetuate such violent acts, and how should we respond to violence in order to remove it from our co-created reality?
The quick answer to the why, is that we are creating such events in order that we do something about one of our most pernicious beliefs entrenched within our collective psyche—that, as individuals, we believe we are disempowered.
The historic and still pervasive abuse of children, spouses, other life forms, and the Earth itself, together with the escalating acts of terrorism, might suggest that we are all off to “hell in a handcart.” This may well be the case if we do not deal with the beliefs we hold that can no longer be part of our psychological structure. Violent events are created by the disempowered. For violence to diminish in our reality, we must first address the belief that our individual power has no worth. [bctt tweet=”Co-created, painful “mass events” always tell us to examine and question our belief systems.”]
Continue reading “The Best Way to Respond to Violence”
Caught on a street surveillance camera shortly after their attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices, two of the terrorists proclaimed, “The Prophet Muhammad has been avenged!” They were inferring that staff at Charlie Hebdo had violated the Prophet in some way and had now been “punished” in accordance with Islamic Law. Apparently, their “offense” was the unlawful depiction (a satirical cartoon) of the Prophet Muhammad on the cover of their magazine.
Interestingly, a little research will tell you that nowhere in the original historic Islamic Law is there a single edict or decree that prohibits pictorial imagery of the Prophet. More recent “fatwas” issued by the Taliban (published online in 2001) may have given rise to this mythical new law, when they decreed that all non-Islamic statues and shrines in Afghanistan be destroyed. You might suppose that a cartoon drawing of the Prophet might just fall under the description of “non-Islamic artwork,” however, as it would be impossible to destroy all copies of the artwork, do the artists themselves need to be destroyed? Apparently so, in the minds of the extremists involved. Accord to them, the Prophet Muhammad would condone their actions and reward them in the afterlife.
To those of us with less fanatical Islamic sensibilities, we are left deeply saddened, perplexed, and angry over the spurious logic concocted to support their murderous acts.
Continue reading “Je suis poking Charlie – part 3 of 3.”
So, our “problem” with beliefs is nothing to do with beliefs themselves, as they are neutral psychological constructs developed by our egos so that we can make sense of the world. The problem lies with the amount of energy our egos assign to our beliefs over time—both from an individual’s standpoint and collectively as groups. Putting a great deal of energy behind a belief, particularly emotional energy, is what propels them from being “open to debate” into incontestable camouflaged beliefs masquerading as absolute “truths.”
We need to understand the true nature of beliefs*
When we emotionally nurture a belief into a truth, it becomes serious. That is, we can no longer examine them, debate them, or make fun of them—according to our egos. We solemnize them. Religions are very good at solemnizing their beliefs. Moreover, when beliefs are seriously solemnized they can very easily turn into “laws”—seen by our egos as universal laws that must apply to everyone, whether they believe in the beliefs that created them or not!
But beliefs cannot be truths. Remember, there is only one Truth—the Oneness of Consciousness/All-That-Is/Your God. Your ego may be adamant that some of its beliefs must be true, but they are always only your personal truths—the beliefs you imagine to be true.
Beliefs of any description are not Truth; therefore, they cannot be taken seriously!
Continue reading “Je suis poking Charlie (part 2 of 3)”