The values in the world are fast changing. Some people are speaking of a "new pattern of behaviour" which ought to replace the present pattern which is causing chaos; some speak of the moral code as being changeable, and say that if the great Teachers of humanity were to come again today they would give a different set of morals for us to follow. All this bewilders people.
Much of this confusion of thought results from the decadence of orthodox religions and the growth of science. Old concepts are yielding place to new ones. No thinking person can any longer believe, for instance, that the Earth is just a few thousand years old, or that it is the most important of the planets in the Universe. Knowledge of the vast Universe, as also of the tiny atom, is constantly expanding. And archaeology is taking us further and further back into time and revealing the glories of the past, so that it is no longer possible to believe that our own civilization and achievements have reached a height of glory never reached before.
Though our concepts change, is there not a body of Knowledge which is unchanging and a moral code which alters not with the passage of time? Towards the close of The Secret Doctrine (II, 794), Madame Blavatsky wrote:
It is only by bringing before the reader an abundance of proofs all tending to show that in every age, under every condition of civilization and knowledge, the educated classes of every nation made themselves the more or less faithful echoes of one identical system and its fundamental traditions—that he can be made to see that so many streams of the same water must have had a common source from which they started.
Thus, today, by a study of this book or of the writings of old philosophers, everyone has an opportunity to see for himself that the moral code or ethics of all religions are fundamentally the same; it is their interpretation that differ. This must be so, as true moral law is the law of Life, irrespective of time and civilization.
Mankind is, therefore, in a maze. "Is God dead?" is the question people are asking today. But few ask the question, "Did God as ordinarily understood ever exist at all?"
Even students of Theosophy sometimes find it difficult to get used to the idea that an anthropomorphic, extracosmic God, under whatever form or name—Jehovah, Father in Heaven, Allah, Ahura Mazda, Krishna, Shiva, Vishnu—never existed at all and does not exist today! Therefore prayers and gifts to such a "God" are in vain. As the Buddha said, the gods are helpless to give man what he asks of them. Rituals and ceremonies cannot help, though man is psychologized into believing that they do. The true nature and value of rituals is unknown today, for their inner significance is forgotten and the crude outer form remains.
As students of Theosophy, should we not take to heart these words: "No human-born doctrine, no creed, however sanctified by custom and antiquity, can compare in sacredness with the religion of Nature"? And a good deal of practical guidance is contained in the statement that Theosophy is in the world "to fell and uproot the deadly upas trees of superstitions, prejudices, and conceited ignorance." Our duty consists in helping on with this task.
Our difficulty lies in differentiating man-made rules and customs from Nature's rules and customs. The cry down the ages has always been, "Choose ye this day whom ye will serve." A study of Theosophical teachings will give us the reasons why certain things are right and certain things are wrong, for all times and in all places, and it is these reasons that we must seek to base our thinking and actions on.
The "new" pattern of behaviour must be one which recognizes the lawful character of the whole world, physical, mental and moral. Man feeds himself on the produce of the earth; so do the animals, birds and insects. But each has to give back to Nature in proportion as it takes. In Nature's economy there is nothing useless, there is no "waste" matter.
The "new" pattern of behaviour must be one which accepts the fundamental rights of man and of all creatures—to live, to act for the common good, to be responsible to oneself and to one's community or nation for what one does. This sense of responsibility towards all is the only practical basis for a successful brotherhood of all men and of all creatures. But we fear this sense of responsibility and take the easy path of following science or what others tell us. We have lost fear of God, which is said to be the beginning of wisdom, and adopted faith in science. If we use the term "Law" for "God," then we can see that there is good sense in fearing Law, until we realize that obedience to it makes it our ally.
An ecological journal once stated:
Our survival depends upon balancing science with the philosophical, artistic and religious reflections and activities that belong inherently to the nature of human consciousness and are intended as part of the human ecology.
Speaking of science and technology, it said:
Science, being pure thought, harms no one; therefore it need not be humanistic. But technology is action, and often potentially dangerous....Never before, in all his long life on earth, has man possessed such enormous power to injure his human fellows and his society as has been put into his hands by modern technology. That is why it is important to maintain a humanistic attitude towards technology; to recognize clearly that since it is a product of human effort, technology can have no legitimate purpose but to serve man—man in general...man in the totality of his humanity, encompassing all his manifold interests and needs, nor merely one particular concern of his.
Is it not in this light that we should look upon all methods of medical science which are supposed to give us "immunity" from this or that disease, or to enable us to escape the due effects of our actions? Also, what should be the right attitude to the body, alive or dead, and to the use of animals for research work? Artificial hearts, someone else's liver or kidneys—perhaps of an executed criminal—another person's cornea, a collection of "spare parts" ready for use—where are our changing values leading us?
