I became politically aware in the 60’s, which was the most thrilling decade in American political and cultural growth. First at Catholic Creighton University, and then at Indiana University, I transformed into an agnostic liberal, and even a longhaired hippie, minus the drug abuse. I protested against the Vietnam War. I chanted against Richard Nixon.
Fast forward to my time in the Middle East, where I was a psychologist, actor and singer (some combination, huh?). There, I became New Age.
Many of the ideas of the New Age movement are elements of older spiritual and religious traditions, from both east and west, melded with modern ideas from science especially psychology and ecology. Out of the movement have come a wide-ranging literature on spirituality, new musical styles and even crafts - most visible in specialty shops and New Age fairs. The name "New Age" also refers to part of the LOHAS market segment in which its goods and services are sold to people in the movement.*Now, I believe in God, but I’m not thrilled so much with organized religions. I still keep in my heart many Catholic teachings, some Jewish wisdom, and several New Age principles.
Three prominent teachers of New-Age popular philosophies have been Wayne Dyer, Deepak Chopra, and Marianne Williamson.
Wayne Dyer is one of the most widely known and respected people in the field of self-empowerment, affectionately called the "father of motivation" by some of his fans. He first attained popularity with his book Your Erroneous Zones.*
Deepak Chopra, M.D., is a medical doctor and popular contemporary writer in the United States on spirituality, synchronicity, integrative medicine and Ayurveda. He writes about holistically treating the body and promotes Ayurveda, the traditional Indian system of medicine. He claims Hinduism as his main influence, specifically the teachings of Vedanta and the Bhagavad Gita. In 1989 he became famous for his work Quantum Healing: Exploring the Frontiers of Mind/Body Medicine.*Marianne Williamson’s earliest renown was for her talks on A Course in Miracles, a step-by-step method for choosing love over fear.
I love all three of these gurus.
I also think they are missing something in their outlook. There is something wrong with Wayne Dyer and his philosophy. Ditto with Deepak and Marianne. This is the same thing, I believe, that is wrong with liberals, feminists, the Democratic party, other New-Agers, and with much of America today, as a matter of fact.
The answer lies in the concepts of yin and yang, the polar opposites which must be in balance to lead a healthy life.
Yin, the darker element, is passive, dark, feminine, downward-seeking, and corresponds to the night; yang, the brighter element, is active, light, masculine, upward-seeking and corresponds to the day; yin is often symbolized by water, while yang is symbolized by fire.*The trouble with Wayne Dyer, Deepak, and Marianne, is that they devote all their philosophy only to yin. They not only neglect yang, they devalue and omit it entirely.
The opposite of Wayne Dyer, Deepak Chopra, and Marianne Williamson are the characters Nicolo Machiavelli and Sun Tzu.
Niccolò di dei Machiavelli (May 3, 1469 – June 21, 1527) was a Florentine political philosopher, musician, poet, and romantic comedic playwright. Machiavelli was also a key figure in realist political theory, crucial to European statecraft Renaissance and early Protestant Reformation, which shaped the contemporary diplomatic behavior of nations. Machiavelli was one of the first people to objectively study the practice and implementation of politics and government.*
Sun Tzu wrote The Art of War, a Chinese military treatise created during the 6th century BC. Composed of 13 chapters, each of which is devoted to one aspect of warfare. It has long been praised as the definitive work on military strategies and tactics of its time.*These folks represent the darker side of human coping, the ultimate yang proponents. While Jesus, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King could be said to be effective preachers of yin, Mohammed, Machiavelli, Tzu, and Malcolm X were the gurus of yang.
A healthy, effective life must include both—yin and yang.
The answer is provided by King Solomon in Eccles. 3:1,8,11,
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven... a time for war and a time for peace... He has made everything beautiful in its time.I paraphrase a certain rabbi:
Peace is surely a magnificent thing, but only when its time comes. As with any other trait, G-d "made everything beautiful - IN ITS TIME." To apply a trait in an inappropriate time or place is a foul deed. It is just so with war and peace. Each has a time, and that time is learned from the laws of war and peace scattered throughout the Torah.The problem with Wayne Dyer, Deepak, Marianne, other New Agers, liberals, the Democratic Party, and 50% of America at this time, is that they devalue and omit all yang. Ultimately, this leads to a weakened country, unruly children, criminal activity, and worldwide bloodshed. Wayne Dyer is promoting an unbalanced life.
The terrorists have the opposite, but still similar problem. They embrace only yang. They are just as unbalanced as we are. It’s the imbalance that leads to horror.
We have become a feminized culture. We devalue the masculine. Some of us would shirk our responsibility to wage war when it is necessary. Anti-war advocates of today are unhealthy proponents of only yin. These “peace advocates” seek peace at any cost, and this inevitably leads to more war than is necessary. “Peace advocates” bring bloodshed and misery to the world.
To win the war on terror, and climb back to a healthy culture, we need more balance between yin and yang. There will be a time for peace again in America, and in the world. At this moment, however, we are in a season of war. When the season for peace comes again, I’ll join Cindy Sheehan in calling for it. At this time, though, I shun her as a perfect example of an unbalanced loon.
Wayne Dyer remains Wayne Dyer, an unbalanced guy whose total answer to life’s problems are flowers, peace, love, joy, acceptance and goodwill, and singing kumbayah. Sounds nice, but it’s only half complete. He also needs to stand up to bullies, fight for his children, battle evil, and wage war on terrorists. Then, if he also keeps his yin intact, he’ll be a complete, effective man. A real man of peace.
(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)
This Post’s Technorati Tags: war, peace, yin, yang, Wayne Dyer, Deepak Chopra, Marianne Williamson, New Age, Mohammed, Sun Tzu, Malcolm X, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Ecclesastes, truth
Support this site! Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way!
Truth—The No Spin Politically Incorrect Zone
5 comments:
.
if we are looking for balance in our lives, one should consider the following:
1) the yin-yang concept was developed and expressed at the level of ... mmmmmm .... individual souls.
And it is NOT OBVIOUS AT ALL whether this concept is applicable at the level of societies and political ideologies.
2) it seems ok to fight war when necessary. it doesn't seem ok to go out and seek fight when it is not necessary.
or, when situation changes, but someone stubbornly "stays course" - he's proving that he's not yang, but dick (head).
3) at least, "preachers of yin" live or genuinely try to live the way they preach. Shouldn't the same be expected of "preachers of yang"? If they like fighting that much, shouldn't they lead the troops into the battlefield themselves?
Alas, our great yangs (neo-cons), preach out of yin-comfortable offices/homes in the yin-cuddling belly of the most comfortable country on Earth - America.
And those great yangs expect others to go out and kill and die in the name of yangs' cause.
This was a very good post and quite insightful- I definitely agree that balance is always necessary to harmony- personal, global and otherwise. However, I still cannot wrap my mind around the notion that death from war is a necessary evil to achieve peace. It seems that most, if not all conflicts in history that have risen to the level of bloodshed have little to do with a lack of cosmic "balance" but instead due to a simple yet profound human lack of respect for different social ideals (political/religious/
cultural/economic). The leaders of those armed conflicts, though great in certain respects may have had a bit of a mental imbalance (Hitler, Napolean, Stalin, Patton, Saddam, Bush, Zulu, bin Laden) but for the most part, it's man's incapacity to PEACEFULLY agree to
disagree that leads to destruction. Maybe that is the natural order of things- that man actually CAN'T peacefully disagree without bloodshed, maybe it's our form of population control, but I would argue that if we're modernized and intelligent enough to invent better weapons of war, we're bright enough to create better methods of peace.
Thanks for the compliment, paz y amour.
Thank you both for cogently expressing your points of view. I disagree with you both, but I definitely see where you're coming from.
I'm not talking about wars of conquest or even of choice. I'm talking about wars in defense of liberty or life. I know you two don't see any need to respond to 9/11 at all, which I can't understand. You also seem to think that Israel should just accept 4000 missiles showering down on them without doing anything. This I can't understand.
This is your imabalance in yin an yang. Life does not let you get away with being nice to monsters. Monsters will kill you if you don't kill them.
One of the great weaknesses of a democracy is that the government must convince not just the hawks, but also the people that feel as you do, that a war is necessary. The world, and now even most Americans, seem to agree with you guys at this time. You're wrong, though. Your position, if followed, would, I believe, lead to much more death than you can even imagine.
The world is in a sorry state, when the agressors get world sympathy, and the good guys, like Bush and the Israelis, get nothing but scorn and hatred. All I can do is my part of speaking out.
Thank you for your opinions.
Hey,
I aint a blogger... but i love reading blogs.. it gets me connected.. i read ur blog on Wayne Dyer and how he is flawed... everybody is flawed and they keep improving.. let us not judge here... the second point i wanna tell here is i am a die hard follower of yin yang concept... this does not speak about the negative as it is portrayed... it is more on the symmetry in nature.. the negative side that is yang is just the opposite of yin and not the bad negative.. but just a good negative otherwise it is just the opposite.. a male and a female , the dark n the light.. etc... this is wat yang represents... I have read a few books of Wayne Dyer and it talks more about thought process than this philosopy... if i am wrong some where or any part of my writing is not clear and excuse me for my typos... contact me at ksrinandan[at]gmail[dot]com
Much Truth in your evaluation about balance - even Jesus said the world will always have its poor - yin & yang are a way of our existence on the earth plane. Many of the current spiritual gurus do seem to believe that the world is experiencing a transformation of consciousness that will result in a kind of heaven on earth - I wouldn't bet on it!
However the one thing that most of these gurus also teach - and that is 100% Truth - each individual on earth has the "potential" to experience "heaven on earth", regardless of what is going on in the world at large. Ultimately that is the key to a happy life. When properly understood that is also what Jesus taught.
Post a Comment