Mr. Ryuho Okawa preaches us that the laws which govern the universe are 'the law of Progress' and 'the law of Harmony'. I think that these two laws are also the key to understand modern political thoughts. For example, the two principles of modern politics which have been put forward since the French Revolution are 'Freedom' and 'Equality'. In my point of view, freedom originates from the law of Progress, and equality originates from harmony respectively. These two principles have lead two economical structures; one is Capitalism (free economy), and the other is Socialism/Communism (planning economy). The former comes from the principle of freedom and the latter from the principle of equality. Capitalism is the system that respects and makes the most use of individual ability and human free activity but that is apt to magnify the disparity in wealth. Socialism is the system that respects human equality and makes efforts to prevent the disparity in wealth but that is apt to obstruct human freedom and spoil individual ability and cause the stagnation of economy.
Freedom and equality have been two basic issues of constitution since the French Revolution. Many statesmen, lawyers and jurists have been making efforts to coordinate them. We have been taking it for granted that anyone can assert his/her own freedom and equality as basic human rights. But today, we cannot help but admit that it gradually becomes difficult for many governments to coordinate the basic human right of their residents in many cases. Various kinds of human rights or interests based on human rights often conflict with each other and produce frictions in many cases here and there. For instance, conflicts between those who assert the free economical activities and those who assert the right to live; conflicts between development and conservation of nature, road construction and eviction, free trade and protective tariff, and so on. Perhaps some of conflicts stems from the tendencies of individual souls. Judging from the today's trends, I think we will not be able to coordinate them.
The spirits of freedom and equality destroyed the Ancient Regime politically and have been guiding the world not only politically but also economically and socially. But today it is clear that these two principles are facing a deadlock. Mr Ryuho Okawa suggests that these two principles shall be replaced by the other two principles 'Wisdom' and 'Mercy' in the next century. Wisdom set us free from ignorance. With wisdom, we are set free from all restraint. To get wisdom is not right for human beings but duty and mission as children of Buddha. Buddha's heart is full of mercy to save people, and we should have mercy in our hearts too. With wisdom and mercy, we will be able to understand each other and avoid needless conflicts. The spirit of wisdom and mercy will lead us a new paradigm. In order to obtain wisdom, we should learn many things above all things Buddha's truth. Mercy means giving love for others, tolerance and forgiveness. For that purpose, Great Saviors have come down to the earth and preached Gospels , and Buddha(God) has sent angels of light.
Human beings are equal and live under the same law 'equality' in the meaning that every one has the same function of mind and that he/she is allowed to control and to use mind freely. We can use it well and badly as we like. But the results will be different in accordance with how he/she use the function of mind. If you manage to control your mind well, you will meet with good results. If you fail to control your mind, you will not. We can say this is 'the law of cause and effect'.
In spiritual world, if a person makes efforts, he/she gets Buddha's light. If a person neglects to make effort, he/she loses Buddha's light. This is a definite law. As a principle, we are given equal opportunity to improve ourselves, and we are treated fairly according to the results of our effort. Then, the principle of equal opportunity will bring discrimination for the result of our effort. That is fairness.
In spite of influences of circumstance, at every moment we are able to make decision and respond and react to what happen inside and outside of our minds. And through reincarnation, inevitably we have to bear responsibility for the results of what we have done. Therefore, everyone has his/her responsibility, and freedom is always accompanied by responsibility. I think this is one of explanation of freedom. I suppose that Immanuel Kant might have understood this point.
My conclusion is that in spiritual world each soul is free and equal because Buddha(God) created human souls as they are. After all Freedom and equality will not contradict each other in the real world, though they often contradict each other on the earth. In my opinion, the contradiction of freedom and equality stems from the multi-dimensional structure of the universe.
As far as what I have written and am going to write on this site is concerned, I have not strictly considered and not revised the wording nor I will not. Actually when I write this essay, I do not always consult the original texts.
But I am sure, assuming that Buddha(God) exists and human beings reincarnate, ontology and epistemology will have to be revised. Assuming divinity and reincarnation to be true, and of course I believe so, all of sciences should be reconstructed in next some tens years. We will be able to find a clue to resolve various kinds of problems, if we regain the religious faith in our hands which we once lost.
It is said that Aristotle established the science system and created technical terms of philosophy. And he criticized the concept of 'idea' which is advocated by his master Plato. Aristotle argued that statements about objects should be reduced to statements about what is perceived or perceivable of this world of phenomenon. But I am sure the world view of Plato was more affluent and meaningful.
Kant might have restricted the objects of science to the fields which human reason can catch and grasp. But in this century neo-Kantians began to argue that the objects of science should to be restricted what we can grasp with Kant's 'pure reason'. But I am sure that Kant left the door open to the religious faith.
What we are discussing is not all of the world and universe. It is mistake that we misinterpret what we can grasp by words as all of the world.
Nietzsche devoted himself to eastern thought especially the Zoroastrian dualism of good and evil, but I think he could not recognize that good and evil undeniably exist not only this world but also the other world. For he was convinced of the untenability of the 'God hypothesis', and indeed of all religious and metaphysical interpretation of the world. He concluded by the words 'the death of God'. As he proclaimed 'superman or higher men', he was never awed by God. He fell in the depth of the darkness.
Heidegger taught us how easily we are led into 'average of everydayness'. His thought urges us to do something in our life. But what shall we do? He did not teach us the mission of human BEING and human life.
I do not argue that sciences should serve theology. When sciences serve theology, theology would hinder the progress of sciences. When we misinterpret the objects which sciences can catch and grasp as all of world and universe, sciences would lose the meaning of human life. Sciences should contribute to human happiness and development. I would like to leave argument of special subjects of studies to specialists of their own fields. Anyway, in next century a new Renaissance will come in the world of science.
Now we are surmounting the science system since Aristotle, the dualism of 'sein'(to be) and 'sollen'(ought to be) after Kant, the materialistic dialectic of Marx and the ontology of Heidegger with teachings of Master Ryuho Okawa.
Sciences are inseparable from hypotheses. Especially natural sciences have made progress in accordance with putting forward of new conjectures based on hypotheses and with verifying and disproving/refutation of them. You, intelligent visitors to this site, would think I set up the hytheses of God, of the other world and of reincarnation. And you may think that I make up a view of world with the hypothesis of multi-dimensional universe. In order to make the theory(hypothesis) dynamic, you may think, I give time under the laws of progress and harmony that is Buddha's(God's) will and works as a vector. Probably, intelligent visitors would think it is not allowed to bring metaphysics in sciences.
It seems to me that the history of philosophy is a history to narrow objects of arguments down and we lost the purpose of philosophy, as if to narrow a focus down from a forest to a tree, a trunk, a branch and to a leaf and forget why we observe the forest. They once learned how to live better from Ancient Greek philosophy, but no one expects a path how to live from modern philosophy anymore. Nowadays people expect the solutions of lives rather from literature and movies. Great philosophers have been excluding all hypotheses such as God and the other world that they had not been able to verify. Great philosophers have been excluding the concept of God and the other world, and have been doing detailed studies. They have purified philosophy to quest for truth, but have forgot the purpose of questing for truth is happy life of each individual.
Descartes doubted even the existence of God and at last said 'I am thinking, therefore I exist'. On the other hand when Chuang-tzu, a Taoist, dreamt that he was flying comfortably as a butterfly and he woke from the dream, he said that he wondered which one real himself was, 'He' after waking from a dream or 'He' as a butterfly flying in his dream. Descartes was sure 'the existence of thinking subject' was not an illusion, but Chuang-tzu wondered 'the existence of thinking subject' itself. In short, the premise of modern philosophy that this world has firm substance is itself a hypothesis where metaphysics lies uncritically.
Assuming that the other world has substance and this world is the phenomenon of materialization by divinity, the hypothesis of 'things in themselves' by Kant and the hypothesis of 'quarks' by modern physicists seems to be incomplete. Because, in both theories, the law of cause and effect concludes within this world. When we premise the other world and reincarnation, thinking causality conclude within this world is just a hypothesis or just a creed, which lacks interaction between this world and the other world.
Like Karl Popper, someone may think no matter what hypothesis we may set up, it must be the one that allows and enables to refute. But, whether we set a hypothesis the other world exists and this world and the other world affect each other or we set a hypothesis the other world does not exist and the law of causality concludes within this world, both two hypothesis do not allow and enable us to refute. Someone would think we do not have to take account of the other world, because we can not see it nor confirm whether it exists or not. And that is why many great thinkers have not taken account of it. That is an well-known opinion, but I say the history of science is the history that human being have struggled to search what we cannot see nor confirm. There is no reason to exclude the concept of the other world from sciences. Although we can not see it nor confirm its existence scientifically right now, it is possible to establish sciences on the premise that the other world exists.
(And I add, if you practice four fold path truth(love, knowledge, reflection development), you will soon understand and confirm the interaction between this world and the other world.)
Unended part VUnended part VII
Unended Quest vol.2