Discussions
Your opinion on: Peace by Paulo Coelho
Posted by PauloCoelho • 4/28/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: confrontation, paulo coelho, peace, war, world
What is really the meaning of the word peace?
Sometimes people dont understand why I use the term Warrior of Light since Im engaged in a kind of confrontation with life. I do this because I believe that Nature is also in a state of confrontation: springtime against winter, winter against summer, lions against zebras, etc.
For me peace is an utopia as far as Nature is concerned.
That said we need to strive for peace among ourselves but we also need to keep in mind that absolute peace is an utopia despite the many attempts of peace in the world. Consequently this state of peace may lead to boredom.
In the light of this: Do you really want peace in the world? Have you ever considered that there was never peace in the world and that therefore this goal may simply be unattainable?
Video question: www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PYdTWDil9U
User Comments
-
Paulo,
I often think that since man's evolutionary nature has been established as nomadic hunter-killers (the herbalists died off, the killers survived), we will remain in this state of evolution until something radical changes us all. Perhaps another deadly plague, perhaps another world war that will end with all national borders being eradicated. One would hope for the evolution into spiritual beings, as in Arthur C. Clarke's "Childhood's End", but that seems still centuries away, sadly.
As long as there are invisible national boundaries, we will always have each nation's own sovereignty and security causing wars.
Perhaps when the polar caps melt, and 90% of the world's populations are displaced who live along coastlines and major rivers, then we can lose the nationalistic militarism that keeps the world in conflict.
Just because we have the term utopia doesn't mean it cannot be attained. Most of our reality is created from dreams; the future is what we build from these. We also have the opposite term: dystopia, which seems to be the current world state for the last 3000-5000 years at least. If one can be reality, so can its opposite; the Yin-Yang of the universe should always eventually occur to balance each other.
Mankind apparently also finds some sort of validation in the glory and courage necessary for warriors. It seems that women don't have this need as much as the need to create and foster life, thankfully! We all need to assert this feminine grace toward life, and forget about the valor of war, which it attained at the high cost of innocent life. If, rather than "good/evil" struggles, we all just concentrated on progress, exploration, healing, and creating, we might find a better alternative than death and destruction.
A quote from Lawrence of Arabia, "War is for young men of courage and valor, keeping the peace is for old men with nothing else to do." (Alec Guinness as Prince Feisal). Great script, won an Oscar.
Personally, I would go to jail before fighting in any war or killing another being, nothing is that important. I would die myself before becoming a killer.
Peace to all, Jose -
Jose,
you wrote: "As long as there are invisible national boundaries, we will always have each nation's own sovereignty and security causing wars".
I'd just like to point out that if there were no national boundaries, there would always be people trying to create them. The result of the creation of those boundaries would cause far more misery than the defense of those boundaries.
Boundaries are a wise investment for those who can manage well what the boundaries contain within.
You also wrote: "Personally, I would go to jail before fighting in any war or killing another being, nothing is that important. I would die myself before becoming a killer".
There is a difference between killing and murdering.
Is there nothing you would defend with your life?
I assume (if you have a family) that you would defend your family against physical harm.
If so, then supposing you are a free man with a family in a free nation and the equivalent of the Nazis are making their way to your nation.
Having knowledge of the death and destruction already experienced by other nations at the hand of this Nazi like army that is making it's way to you, are you saying that you would not take up arms and take the life of invaders to defend your free nation and your family?
By taking up arms wouldn't you be making an attempt to in fact defend the future of your children and their children?-
Well, we're talking about philosophical choices, aren't we - not real life or death situations. Would I shoot a home invader if I had a wife and kids and he was armed? Sure.. would I stop Nazis from hauling away Jewish kids? you bet...
I had this dream as a child - and it was later verified by a woman I met in my 40's. I was a Nazi in uniform, and was burned alive in a pit with Jews. No one in my family had ever been to Europe - my dad served in the Pacific then Korea 7 years later, so there were no links to me and Europe and WW2 (born in 1950).
Later I met a woman, we meditated together, and I told her this story, the first person who ever heard it. She started crying, went to her writing desk and pulled out a story she said was her prior lifetime.
In that story, a Nazi officer found out they were killing Jews - he protested. They decided to burn him in a pit with all the Jews of a village. She was a little girl in the pit, and the officer held the girl to comfort her. The entire group had gasoline poured over them and were set on fire. She swears I was the officer, and we met in this lifetime so she could tell me and thank me. She and others have told me I died in WW2, and many who did were reincarnated right away (the baby boom), because it was an aberration that so many died at once (over 200 million in all).
I've since written this to several people, but only after three others verfied the woman's story independently. Before this I wasn't sure I believed in reincarnation, but I had my suspicions even as a child. At age 5 I saw photos of Auschwitz in a book at my grandmother's house and the whole sequence seemed very familiar yet at the time I didn't even know what death was.
There are times you will sacrifice yourself for others, there are time you may kill for others - but as I now believe in reincarnation, there may be longer lasting consequences than most people believe. "forgive me" just might not be good enough. One always wonder about Joan d'Arc, who would behead 20 soldiers in battle, be drenched in blood to her shoulders, and not remember anything, being in a state of shock. Holy warrior or homicidal maniac? she was just a teenager, and God "told her to kill the British". First condemned, burned at the stake, later pardoned, then sainted! Exactly what kind of religion does that represent? Do we want a world of Joan d'Arc's, all valiantly marching forward to "kill any outsiders"?
That's where we are today. We need a "world government", one earth without nations - and perhaps a place like Greenland where soldiers can go to duel it out with other soldiers, leaving innocent civilians like a village full of Jews, or Muslims, or athiests, or 'heathens', totally out of harm's way. It doesn't matter what they believe, they have a right to their own life, and the right to live without fear of invasion.
As for Vietnam - fighting for oil and democracy, built on a lie (the Gulf of Tonkien, an admitted hoax by Robert McNamara in his autobiography), and where street terrorism was conducted by the CIA - NO, I would not have KILLED people for politics or economics. Nor Iraqis for the Bush regime. But I would try to stop a street terrorist if I saw one to save innocent people.
My own life is meaningless; it would be served better to give it up helping others, defending others. I don't see how I can help the world or myself by choosing to go kill for a cause or a flag or a national policy. I don't remember "thou shalt not kill" having a list of conditions, and its far older than Moses, it was also quoted in the Egyptian House of the Dead (for Osiris?), you had to vow that you had not killed, ordered anyone killed, allowed anyone to be killed, or caused a death by neglect. Far more comprehensive than the Moses commandments, there were 44 in all and you couldn't be complicent in killing in any way.
It's a personal decision, I don't expect many nations or governments to ever give up sending others to do their killing for them.
-
-
Yes, were are speaking of philosophical choices I suppose.
But the scenario I presented, while obviously a 'what if' for you and I, was a reality for thousands in WW2 and a reality for millions through out history.
As for the remainder, many places I could go. I do not believe in reincarnation and even if I did there is no way to take an argument/position when your borders are able to be so fluid that you need not have a fixed place or idea.
I will note quickly that your world government will do nothing more than deliver the population of the world into serfdom. The simple and so far, fairly soft chattering of world government that we hear today makes the direction such an organization would go very clear.
It is also clear that you will eventually get your world government. You won't want it once you have because you WILL cease to be yours and you WILL be the governments. It is unavoidable. -
If Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King were stranded on a desert island, they'd soon find something to fight about. The riddle human beings will never solve is how to get along. Call it nature, human nature, historical necessity-whatever! The only thing I, as an individual, can control in this whole crazy chaotic universe is my own actions. So if peace is what I truly want, I will do everything in my power to remain peaceful. Our actions make us who we are. -
Does it change something that the people want peace or not since they do not decide ?
Sir Bertrand Russell, Philisopher and Nobel Prize ( nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1950/ ) , advocates in 1953 in his essay "The Impact of Science on Society":
www.amazon.co.uk/Impact-Science-Society-Bertrand-Russell/dp/041510906X
"...At present the population of the world is increasing at about 58,000 per diem. War, so far, has had no very great effect on this increase, which continued throughout each of the world wars.... War ... has hitherto been disappointing in this respect ... but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective. If a Black Death could spread throughout the world once in every generation.... The state of affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of it? Really high-minded people are indifferent to happiness, especially other peoples'...."-
Who decides?
-
99.9% of the people in the world could want peace, if the remaining want war, then it is war they will have.
I'm a Christian who believes peace will not be known until the return of Christ, I believe history and the clearest glimpse into our immediate future demonstrates that man will never know or bring about any kind of lasting peace by their own accord.
-
-
While Paulo may be correct in that "absolute peace may be a utopia", I find his view really depressing. I like to think that there will be a "tipping point" of human enlightenment where wars and fighting will no longer be valued. I do not think that we need them to eliminate boredom. There are many alternative ways to obtain variety in this world.-
Yeah. Like video games. -
I have to be (and sure hope I am) misunderstanding you.
You are not stating boredom as the motive behind war are you?
There will be no tipping point, war will always be.
No matter how 'enlightened' humanity may become, there will always be at least one group of humans who believe themselves more enlightened, smarter, more deserving, etc... And believing that of themselves they will set out to prove it and bring others into their line of thought/reasoning.
-
-
"Nature is also in a state of confrontation: "
I disagree...There is a symbiotic balance to nature...
Of all the billions of lifeforms that inhabit Planet Earth the only life form that engages in war and in general destroying the planet is Mankind...
Peace is possible and life is an amazing miracle that is never boring...-
Man is the only of the lifeforms capable of waging war.
-
-
Ants have armies and often engage in war.
-
Sure, and so does bacteria. I assume you know what was meant though.
-
-
It seems equally futile and naive to me (I'm talking about myself) to believe in the resurrection of Christ as to believe in the resurrection of humankind through some social or political program. Both are based on faith in something that doesn't seem anywhere evident or even apparent in actual experience. I feel it's more honest to accept doubt and a certain degree of hopelessness about the human condition and just do one's best to be the kind of person one would like to be.
-
I won't attempt to hijack the thread and take in a direction not meant, but I believe that the existence of a God is very evident and following that evidence leads one to know that Christ is God
-
some people here seriously need to learn the phrase "metaphysics".. and should also know parable and symbolism when they see it. Ancient people did, as all they had was mythology and parable, there was little hard science. modern man wants to be told "what to think" by others, I think we've grown lazy mentally with the industrial age.. 90% of us simply believe what our parents believed, which I would call stagnation, lack of progress or change..
I tried to explain parables here, and their deeper meanings, but a small hard core group just doesn't get the whole concept, ever (thankfully many young people do):
http:bibledecoded.blogspot.com
"If you don't search for the deeper meaning, all you get is the superficial one" - Joyce Myers (she even uses a fishing parable, "fish in deep water for the more substantial catch"!) -
@rfburnhertz: You lead me to assume that your conviction is not based on faith, but evidence of some kind. This is intriguing. Usually one thinks of evidence in terms of factual material which would guarantee any reasonable person's assent. You are not talking here about a subjective experience, but some sort of objective proof-is that correct? I have no quarrel with what you believe, it's none of my business, but nevertheless I find your claim questionable and I wonder if you ever doubt it yourself.
-
-
To say that one wouldn't want peace because one would be bored is kind of sad....considering the lives that would be saved from peace. But that said, I agree that there never has been peace and there won't be for a very long time. -
Jose,
speaking for myself I do not believe what I believe because of what I was taught by my parents. I do not practice the religion in which I was born and raised.
I came to Christianity as a complete skeptic. My journey into Christianity took years and did not come by my believing everything that was told to me by a pastor or other Christians.
I investigated, so to speak, and found the evidence very solid.
I note how very orthodox you, yourself are.
You express clearly how foolish you think it is for others to hold to a different world view than you do.
I note your mocking tone.
I note your superior tone as well.-
(NOT superior at all - each person has his OWN beliefs and should keep it that way and not bore everyone else - I don't have a "Church" or a motive, and couldn't care less which religion "Wins" in the numbers or dollars game, like some I know and face daily here in the fundamentalist south, where when you meet someone they tell you how much money their church has or made and then they invite you!)
This is for 'rfburnhertz' and other self-evangelists..
Jesus himself said that churches and public displays of religion are for hypocrites (Matthew 6:5-6) - see my post on this:
bibledecoded.blogspot.com/2009/01/public-displays-of-religion-in-bible.html
1. Do you often VIOLATE your own chosen Lord's directives?
2. In Chap 15 of Daniel (removed from the Prostestant bible for obvious reasons), the King of ISRAEL found the priests taking money and food from the congregation, BEHEADED them all, and told the people "DO NOT support the priesthood, you don't need intermediaries with God - you have a direct relationship" - YES! a wiser monarch than the so-called religious "guides"
3. Religion belongs in privacy; its between you and whatever you consider "God" - you're either preaching to the choir in public or angering those that don't believe the same way.
EVEN though raised a Methodist, this constant need of Christians to evangelize really GETS TO ME after 50 yrs and does MORE HARM than good. I've gone from laughter to wanting to speak out AGAINST all this b.s. - eventually I may have to start an "Anti-Church Church", that openly opposes all RELIGION in PUBLIC venues!
By now everyone in the world has heard yer perversion of the message, for the last 1000 yrs, and it hasn't worked yet so it never will.
"One sign of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results." - analytical psychiatry
If I offend the "pious", then (a) sorry, not intended (b) maybe you're either too sensitive or maybe too unsure of your own philosophy (are all the real Christians graves now EMPTY? have others appeared to verify the afterlife? etc... I can understand your insecurity with no "end times" or "rapture" as promised 2000 yrs ago.. NOTHING else has happened as prophecized, has it?? -
...plus YOU are the guy that brought your own religion to this discussion - no one else had at that point.. I didn't see anything religious in this question at all.. historians blame 1.5 billion deaths on Christianity alone (and don't count ww2 even though the Nazis were devout Catholics, with Hitler raised in a convent, the swastika was their logo)... so it's quite obvious that this particular version of Christianity doesn't believe in or want peace at all. the message (From Moses on, read the Old T) seems to be "agree with us or we'll kill you".. if not in a war, then at the stake (Joan d'Arc, one of millions of women burned by CHristians)
-
"I note your superior tone"
yet you claim EVIDENCE that Christ is God?? That's NOT superiority?
"My god is THE god"!!
which MOCKS everyone who thinks otherwise... where did you get this in MY early posts??
I think each person and will develop their own version of the spiritual - if I'm not selling something or someone like YOU are, why should I care at all??
NO religion has worked to cure mankind's ills, no matter how it affected each individual - so I assume its for personal salvation, and not for nations, tribes, cities, or the world at large..
Isn't freedom of religion great? the US government WOULD NOT let me join the Native American Church in college "because you were not BORN Native American" (!!) What kind of freedom is that? does this mean Native Americans can't be Christians?? NO - they were actually FORCED to take "Christian" names or they wouldn't let them into schools! So Running Deer had to be "Elijah" to get a fair deal from "Christians"!
not to mention they were first enslaved by the SPanish then forced to build missions in CHAINS! God's love in action, I presume
-
-
Jose,
I need say nothing beyond pointing out that you have demonstrated my observation of you to be factual.-
If provable we call it "science".
if not, it's just opinion: religion, philosophy, mythology, the arts, etc.. -- all are opinions or self-expression
sometimes we can use logic to deduce facts: your wife is bigger than your kid, you are bigger than your wife - therefore you are bigger than your kid.
I like to say, attempting logic with the Supreme: "The Creation proves the Creator" - then I get arguments from philosophers saying that's not accurate (they call it "artificialism").
However, religion is a personal thing. Each will come to his own conclusions from his own experience, education, practice, and some degree of open-mindedness (without prejudice). If you oppose someon b/c of religion, that's Webster's definition of "bigotry". Everyone has a right to his beliefs.
The original "sin" in "Eden" was eating of "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" - which is judgment. Once you decide "good", then you have also defined its opposite as "evil" - which is supposedly God's domain, not ours. Therefore, this is a "fall from grace", as you are now deciding good and evil. Thats what this parable is about.
I don't know enough to declare any one religion RIGHT, thus all the others WRONG. Someone said "we'll find out when we die" - but not necessarily. Suppose reincarnation is true, like 75% of the world believes, then since we "don't remember", maybe our knowledge and memory are brain dependent, and we lose it in between incarnations.
(there might also only be the "sleep without dreams", as some call death)
I'm open to all theology as possibly valid - I think they call this "pantheism", believing in the value of all religions. If we are all "Children of the same God", then it doesn't matter what we call the Supreme, or how we worship "IT", its the same being regardless. "A rose by another name is still a rose", from Shakespeare.
When someone says "XXX is God, and I can prove it", then I think that's confusing OPINION with FACT. Then later if your "observation has been proven factual", that's also more opinion as fact. (Either that, or "you are God incarnate" - and "we are unworthy!")
I'm open to change, its the only apparent constant in life. I thought I had the answer myself at age 10 or so, same as yours, after reading the Bible twice. Later I examined other philosophies and realized I didn't have all the answers to life at all, mostly questions. Eventually I may come back around to the same view again, because I try to stay non-judgmental and open to new ideas.
personally, I don't care how YOU perceive or judge me, it doesn't affect my thoughts, beliefs, or self-image. and I don't care or need to "size you up" either (like you seem to want to do re others), that also doesn't affect me at all, doesn't add to my self-worth or self-loathing.
Students have used my site for college papers on metaphysics, and thanked me for "opening another window" for them, which was the original intention, not being right or wrong - just "helpful with the goals or tasks of others." I also took two years of meditation and healing classes for the same reason - not 'rightness', just help toward healing myself and others.
If 'blind faith worship' is enough for some, then those are doing all they should be for themselves. If not, there's another level of meaning and philosophy that can be explored. It all helps someone, or it wouldn't still be around, hence "perennial wisdom".
-
-
"Do you really want peace in the world? Have you ever considered that there was never peace in the world and that therefore this goal may simply be unattainable?" ?
I can't see the logics behind your argument : because something has never been achieved would mean we don't want it ?
That a few idiots do not want peace, that's sure, that the majority of people on the whole planet do not want peace especially for their children, that's improbable.
What is sure is that it isn't the mass citizen that decide of peace or war it is our super elites which can easily use fear to convince us to go to war.
And since many pretend to have read George Orwell 1984, I will remind you the REASON WHY WAR IS "NECESSARY" FOR THESE ELITES:
www.george-orwell.org/1984/16.html
"A hierarchical society was only possible on a basis of poverty and ignorance."
To achieve this goal the solution is not ONLY WAR but CONTINIOUS WARFARE:
"Goods must be produced, but they must not be distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this was by continuous warfare."
That is why WAR will be FOREVER, not because we want war but because the elites need it for maintaining their place at the top of the pyramid. -
Many people want to fight all the time. These people want to draw people into their fights with violence. It would be wonderful if we could have a place where those who want to go and fight of their own free will could go and not draw in those who do not want to participate. There are men and women who enjoy being part of the slaughterhouse. They want to prove themselves warriors.
Wars are not just physical. There is a constant "war for ideas". New ideas and old ideas battle for supremacy. For an idea to be forgotten is the same as being dead for many people. Some will not let an idea die and are willing to use force to make others partake of it. This is a major reason there is no peace. Peace is impossible without civilized discourse, something which many can never accept.
Peace is not the absence of conflict, I think of peace as the absence of directed violence for an ideal. Conflict is natural. When it is directed, it makes people climb mountains, build bridges, go to the moon. -
So what?? Should we fight since it's impossible to provide peace? No way. Besides i'm deadly tired and going bed now.-
don't worry, get a good night's rest. they haven't participated in this post in over 5 months so one more night wont hurt. -
I was looking for a resurrection of a cool topic. Nobody could have understood except you.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
