Service and charity don't need God to be authentic

Back in my true believing days, I used to enjoy feeling that what I was doing was an act of service to my guru.

This, of course, is a decidedly Eastern perspective. Western religions don't have living perfect masters, who often are considered to God in human form.

But Christians seem to feel much the same when they perform charitable acts in the name of Jesus. Just as I did, they get enjoyment from acting with the thought that someone they love is being pleased.

Now that I've entered my churchless phase, I don't believe in the value of seva (an Indian word meaning selfless service) as I did before. As noted in a "Morality has nothing to do with religion" post a few years ago, selfless service has many guises.

Speaking of painting posts in our carport, I said:

I knew that my wife was going to like the new look of the carport. So would anyone else who lived in our house (we're planning to live here for many more years, but, hey, you never know what the future will bring). I put more care into my painting than the job really required, because I had a feeling that the work I was doing could easily live on after me.

So I wasn't doing it just for myself and my wife. Back in my devotional days I would have dedicated this seva (service) to my guru, or to God. However, today I simply painted with the same quasi-selfless attitude of "not for me, but for thee." The only difference is that I didn't personalize or particularize "thee."

Today I had the same feeling as I took advantage of a sunny dry late November day (fairly rare here in western Oregon) to mow and edge the lawn.

Now that I'm sixty-one, I've come to realize that one day there won't be another day for me.

Or at least for the things I enjoy doing around our rural non-easy-care house. This sense of finitude makes simple chores a lot more meaningful, god or guru not being required to produce virtually the same seva sensation I enjoyed for decades.

As I guided the mower around our large yard, I thought, "Eventually there will be the last time I do this. I could die suddenly. Or get infirm slowly. Regardless, most likely I won't know which is the last time. So this could be it. Right here, right now. The last grass mowing time."

I visualized having a massive heart attack, collapsing by the mower just after I'd finished. When the ambulance (or hearse) arrives, the driver says, "Hey, that lawn looks pretty damn good."

Nice. 

Of course, the purest motivation for doing something is just to do it. Or even more, to do it without really doing it (wu-wei). I'm not there, for sure, because I still get enjoyment from knowing that what I'm doing will benefit others.

This is natural. People like to help other people. We're social animals, not lone wolves.

Religions, recognizing this, channel charitable impulses for theological purposes. Doing good works for goodness's sake gets redirected into "act in the name of Jesus" (or the guru).

Sounds nice. But what the heck does it mean?

I didn't ponder this much in my super-seva days. Now, I can't understand why someone -- which included me for many years -- would consider that a divine being needed or wanted something done for him/her/it.

My wife likes our house kept neat, clean, and tidy. When I painted the carport posts, I knew that she was going to enjoy their new look. However, I'd be hard pressed to explain why God in heaven or a guru in India cared what the posts looked like (assuming they knew the posts existed).

Religion makes people do strange things. Irrational things. Unnecessary things.

Watching sports on TV, I frequently see "sky pointing" after an athlete has scored a touchdown, hit a home run, or some other noteworthy accomplishment. It rubs me the wrong way.

So God supposedly is responsible for your athletic prowess? God acted through you, giving you some special dispensation that the guy defending you, or pitching to you, lacked?

Where's the humility in that attitude? Where's the sensation of service to your team, or the fans? It's all about you when you point that finger at the sky. It isn't enough to just toss the football to the referee or run around the bases. You've got to make something divinely special out of a simple natural act.

Which, I realize now, is what I did myself during many true believing years. My sky pointing was inside my head, so it wasn't blatantly visible to others -- as the gesture of a football or baseball player is.

But it was there.

And now it isn't. Thank goodness.

Comments

[Alex]

May I suggest two relevant sources:

1. Ethical Culture. A humanist movement affirming ethics does not need God. aeu.org

2. Good Without God. Book by Greg Epstein, Humanist chaplain, Harvard.

[Alex]

May I add something off topic...

Holy Day today!

1. Publication of Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" today, Nov 24, 150 years ago.

2. Spinoza was born today in 1632.

[The Rambling Taoist]

Here's what I want to know: Why don't athletes "sky point" when they drop the would be winning touchdown pass or strike out with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth? If all glory goes to God, then he should be praised when you are basking in the euphoria of victory or wallowing in the misery of defeat.

If it's all part of "God's plan," then any result -- good or bad -- is part of the plan.

[Rain]

Been there. Thought that way also. Now think like you do and like how you put it.

What I see as a limitation in the doing it for a religion or guru or a god is it too often ends up not doing it for other people but only for that religion, guru, god and if it can't profit 'them', it doesn't happen.

We tried to get the last church to which we belonged to do service things where we live like giving clothing or food to someone needy, providing a place where needed goods could be distributed, but without strings; but they were only interested in doing what would get them credit to bring in new members or to help those already members. To do something truly altruistically, it would be for no gain or credit. That is a goal to strive for and not found that often in religions where there has to be glory (for the god) or no gain (in the doing).

[Alex]

The Brights' Net "Reality about Morality" Project
http://the-brights.net/action/activities/organized/arenas/1/

Statement A:
Morality is an evolved repertoire of cognitive and emotional mechanisms with distinct biological underpinnings, as modified by experience acquired throughout the human lifespan.

Statement B:
Morality is not the exclusive domain of Homo sapiens-there is significant cross-species evidence in the scientific literature that animals exhibit "pre-morality" or basic moral behaviors (i.e. those patterns of behavior that parallel central elements of human moral behavior).

Statement C:
Morality is a "human universal" (i.e. exists across all cultures worldwide), a part of human nature acquired during evolution.

Statement D:
Young children and infants demonstrate some aspects of moral cognition and behavior (which precede specific learning experiences and worldview development).

Supporting Research Studies:
The corresponding list of research studies that provide multiple lines of evidence to support each of the above four statements about morality has been placed on the website.

[George]

'So I turn to you and I say
Thank goodness for the good souls that make life better
So I turn to you and I say
If it wasn't for the good souls, life would not matter'

Lyrics from starsailor who i thought rang true. Surely altruism and selflesness embody all that is noblest of the human condition?

I dont know if there is a god or whether such a god rewards or punishes based on earthly performance - but if there is its surely these charitable individuals that bring hope into the lives of others that will be rewarded most.

Even if there is not an afterlife, charity rewards both the giver and receiver; and seems to be about as close as we get to transcending the dog-eat-dog existence that typifies so much of nature and society.