Dharma, Duty, and Freemasonry: Part II

Dharma, Duty, and Freemasonry: Part II

This is Part II of a two part series on Dharma, Duty, and Freemasonry. Readers can view the first installment here: Part I.


“Hindu Dharma is like a boundless ocean teeming with priceless gems. The deeper you dive, the more treasures you find.”  –  Mahatma Gandhi, 1946


In the previous post of this series, I discussed the concepts of duty and dharma. Here, we continue to explore the factors in determining one’s dharma, dharma’s theological foundation, and address the Masonic connection of these themes. 

The Ashrams: Stages of Life

THE next factor in determining one’s Dharma is to consider the stage of life one is currently in: Youth (Student), Adulthood (Householder), Middle Age (Transition away from Worldly focus on the material), and Old Age (Devotion and isolation). These stages are as follows:

Brahmacārya:
  • Life of Preparation, responsibilities as a student
  • Duty: To learn and gain skills

Gṛhastha:

  • Life of the Householder, with family and other social roles
  • Duty: Focus on family and building up Material wealth

Vānprastha:

  • Life of Reflection, retired from past actions, transitioning from worldly occupations and affairs
  • Duty: Contribute back to society with intellectual, spiritual, or material wealth & spending time furthering spiritual development
Sannyāsa:
  • Life of Renunciation, giving away all property, becoming a recluse and devotion to spiritual matters.
  • Duty: Meditation, spiritual study, and worship

Note that individuals move through these stages on a unique basis. Some skip stages entirely, and some never reach the later stages. This is a part of one’s Svadharma or calling in life.

Syadharma: An Individual’s Calling or Life Purpose

FOR example, Sannyasa is a form of asceticism and is represented by a state of disinterest and detachment from material life with the purpose of spending one’s life in peaceful, love-inspired, simple spiritual life. Siddhartha, or Buddha, walked away from the material life to follow the path of Sannyāsa. Similar to a Monk or Nun, individuals may take this path after Brahmacarva and skip the two intermediate stages.

This means that what is “right” action for one individual is “wrong” conduct for another.  A soldier’s duty may require the individual to kill someone, but murder is incorrect conduct for a banker or teacher.

Dharma in The Bhagavad Gita

THERE is a 2,000-year-old treatise, called the Bhagavad Gita or “Song of God”, which is considered the world’s greatest scripture on Dharma. A smaller section of the larger epic work called the Mahabharata, the seven hundred verses of the Bhagavad Gita are arranged in a conversational format between two main speakers Krishna and Arjuna.

Dharma is the first word in the Bhagavad Gita. The great work begins when the blind old king, Dhritarashtra, asks his secretary, Sanjaya, about the battle that was to take place at “the field of Dharma” (Dharma-kshetra). In the name of Dharma, Arjuna (a great warrior and general of the Pandavas) argues for nonviolence by assuming that to attack and kill so many leading men, nearly all of whom are fathers and husbands, will destabilize the important families and communities for which these men are responsible. The families themselves are vital to the peace and virtue of society. 

Lord Krishna (God and Arjuna’s spiritual master) does not at once address Arjuna’s argument about Dharma, as we would expect in a typical debate. Rather, the Lord first reveals to Arjuna, in twenty verses (Bg. 2.11- 30) the eternal nature of the soul. Then the Lord comes back to the topic of Dharma to show that it is Arjuna who is neglecting his Dharma by refusing to fight:

“And even considering your personal Dharma as well, it is not right for you to hesitate. There is nothing better for a warrior than a fight based on Dharma.” (Bg. 2.31)

Here, we find that Dharma itself is meant to assist the real goal of life: understanding the eternal soul and its relationship with the Supreme Soul, Krishna. Lord Krishna concludes this brief reference to Dharma as one’s personal duty by saying: “Now if you do not execute this battle, then having given up your personal Dharma and reputation, you shall incur sin.” (Bg. 2.33)

Throughout the rest of the Volume, Lord Krishna speaks of Dharma in terms of His own teaching of spiritual knowledge and not directly in response to Arjuna’s argument about Dharma as ordinary religious and moral practices. Krishna’s next reference to Dharma reinforces his earlier statement that Arjuna must perform his own Dharma and not neglect it in the name of Dharma. Arjuna can neither protect Dharma nor keep himself on the spiritual platform if he abandons the duties born of his nature. Krishna explains:

“One’s own Dharma, performed imperfectly, is better than another’s Dharma well performed. Destruction in one’s own Dharma is better, for to perform another’s Dharma leads to danger.” (Bg. 3.35)

Thus, the complete picture begins to emerge. An effective government must not only create laws but enforce them as well. Similarly, the Supreme Lord brings forth His law as Dharma. When obedience to His law collapses, and human beings instead propagate their own illicit “law,” the Lord descends to protect the good citizens of His kingdom, vanquish the outlaws who practice adharma, and reestablish in human society the prestige and power of His will.

We can now see why Arjuna’s initial argument – that to obey Lord Krishna and fight would go against Dharma – cannot be correct. Dharma is nothing but the Lord’s will. For Arjuna to fight, then, is true Dharma.

Thus, Lord Krishna starkly contrasts the ordinary Dharma of the Vedas with “this Dharma,” which is pure devotional service to Krishna. Krishna concludes the important ninth chapter by showing the power of this Dharma – unalloyed Krishna consciousness – to purify and save the soul. It is simply on the strength of devotion to Krishna that even a man of terrible conduct quickly becomes devoted to Dharma. So, in this manner all human beings can approach duty or Dharma in the same manner. If all individuals seek the Divine and follow the leading which springs forth, the different rules or requirements of individual Dharma become a single path.

Dharma and Freemasonry

DUTY is an important concept in Freemasonry, similar to a code of conduct by which individuals should mold their character. Moreover, members are instructed to do their duty regardless of the consequence.

Since Masonry is an institution founded on the highest virtues and principles of morality, Masonic duties are in harmony with proper conduct and the laws of their country. Some of these duties include:

To think high, to speak truth, to do well, to be tolerant to others, to search after truth, and to practice liberty under law, fraternal equality, justice, and solidarity.

Moreover, Freemasonry calls on its members to follow an individual path while also working together to uplift humanity. The Craft also inspires the cultivation of similar virtues to those considered part of the Dharma system such as patience, fortitude, and prudence. For some individuals, I posit that Freemasonry could be viewed as a major component or the culmination of that Brother’s individual dharma. What do you think?

Dharma, Duty, and Freemasonry: Part I

Dharma, Duty, and Freemasonry: Part I

WE all have duties, which we are responsible for in life, although some may not ascribe these responsibilities that term. We are responsible for the well-being of families and our own self-improvement. Many of us would say that we have a duty of service to our community or even to humanity as a whole. “Duty” is an important concept in Freemasonry and can be viewed or defined in two basic ways:

  1. a moral or legal obligation; a responsibility, commitment, or allegiance.
  2. a task or action that someone is required to perform.

The first definition speaks to a higher concept – an attitude of reverence or respect in the cause of fidelity. The second definition is more concrete and delineates a specific action one is required to perform. What duties do we owe in life, and do these duties circumscribe our personal Dharma?

What is Dharma?

Dharma is an integral concept in many eastern religions, such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Sikhism. In Hinduism, Dharma has been defined as a spiritual law, which governs the necessary conduct of each individual. While there is no direct, one-word translation in the English language, Dharma can be described as duty, morality, virtues, or calling.

Nothing is higher than Dharma. The weak overcomes the stronger by Dharma, as over a king. Truly that Dharma is the Truth (Satya); therefore, when a man speaks the Truth, they say, “He speaks the Dharma”; and if he speaks Dharma, they say, “He speaks the Truth!” For both are one. — Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, 1.4.xiv

Dharma signifies behaviors that are in accord with Rta, (i.e., the order that upholds the universe). In the Vedic religion, Ṛta (ऋत, “order, rule; truth”) is the principle of natural order which regulates and coordinates the operation of the universe and everything within it. Those ordinances, or life paths, which upholds Rta, are referred to as Dharma, and the action of the individual in relation to those ordinances is referred to as Karma. Ṛta – as an ethical principle – is linked with the notion of cosmic retribution.

A central concept of the Ṛig Veda (an important Hindu Scripture) is that created beings fulfill their true natures when they follow the path set for them by the ordinances of Ṛta, and failing to follow those ordinances was thought to be responsible for the appearance of various forms of calamity and suffering. Committing one’s actions to the governance of Ṛta, referred to as its “Dharma“, was therefore understood as imperative in ensuring one’s own well-being. Karma (lit., “action”) refers to the works one performs, which can occur either in congruence with or in opposition to Dharma – and thus, to Ṛta – and which are posited to stand in a causal relationship to the pains and pleasures one experiences in life. Described also as a “law of moral causation,” Karma places the responsibility for one’s life on the shoulders of the individual. Thus, an individual’s circumstances in life – calamity or fortune – are considered the outcome of that person’s past actions.

Determining One’s Duty: Aspects of Dharma

There are aspects of Dharma that apply to everyone (universal Dharma) and aspects that are specific to each individual (personal Dharma). In order to be in accordance with Rta, one first needs to cultivate certain universal moral principles including:

Dhriti: Perseverance Dhi: Reasoning
Kshama: Patience Vidya: Wisdom
Dama: Self-control Satya: Truthfulness
Shauch: Purity Asteya: Refraining from Theft
Indriya Nigrah: Control of One’s Senses Akrodha: Absence of Anger

Such moral principles are part of the universal application of Dharma, which apply to every individual and is referred to as sadharana Dharma. This is augmented by a person’s specific Dharma, which is impacted by three factors: 1) Gunas: Individual Tendencies, 2) Ashrams: Stages of Life, and 3) Syadharma: One’s Personal Calling.

The Gunas: Tendencies of Each Individual

“What is action; what inaction? Even the wise are hereby perplexed. It is needful to discriminate action, unlawful action, and inaction; mysterious is the path of action” – Bhagavad Gita, iv. 16-17

 The concept of Gunas is based on the idea that all human beings have a mixture of three tendencies: Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas.

  • Sattva: Tendency towards Truth and Purity
  • Rajas: Tendency towards Action
  • Tamas: Tendency towards Inaction, Obstruction, or Ignorance

Gunas, or individual tendencies, are expanded upon by their application to Varnas – or groups within the Hindu social structure – based on the recognition of the difference in individual tendencies and sort all members into one of four categories. Thus, each group follows a different life path and is assigned different duties.    

The Varnas: Groups Within Society

Varnas are groups within society, including Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras.

Brahmins: Priests, Scholars, and Teachers
  1. Predominant tendency: Sattva (Righteous and Purity)
  2. Duties: Control of the mind and the senses, austerity, purity, forbearance, and also uprightness, knowledge, realization, belief in a hereafter
  3. Action: study the Vedas, live according to Vedic principles, and share that knowledge
  4. Form the head of the cosmic being: As they make up the Mouth: Relay Truth

Kshatriyas: Rulers, Warriors, and Statesmen

  1. Predominant tendency: Rajas (Quick to take action)
  2. Duties: Prowess, boldness, fortitude, dexterity, and also not flying from battle, generosity and sovereignty
  3. Action: Protect righteousness
  4. Arms: Protect Truth
Vaishyas: Businessmen, Bankers, Merchants, and Farmers
  1. Mix of the tendencies of Sattva (Truth) and Rajas (Action)
  2. Duty: Agriculture and Trade
  3. Action: Meet the material needs of society without over indulging
  4. Thighs: Provide Material wealth
Shudras: Custodians, Laborers, and Service Providers
  1. Predominant Tendency: Tamas (Inaction)
  2. Duty: Service
  3. Action: Support the other activities of the other groups
  4. Feet: Provide Support

These classifications were once the basis of the Caste system in India and other nations. Based on the Caste or class someone was born into, these classifications cemented the person’s opportunities and social status. This is no longer the case in India, but it does highlight the past subjection of certain people based on their circumstances at birth. This raises the interesting question: Is one’s future predetermined at birth? Are we born with certain qualities [Gunas] which influence our life path, duties, or Dharma?

To be continued…


This is Part I of a two part series on Dharma, Duty, and Freemasonry. Readers can view the second installment here: Part II.

Brother or Friend?

Brother or Friend?

A long time ago, I heard a Freemason tell another that they “should not be friends” with their Brothers. It was a strange comment to me, as I thought that when I joined Freemasonry, I would find like-minded people who I could spend time with, conversing and changing the course of the universe, all of us achieving amazing and lofty ambitions. These are the things you do with people you like. And don’t you like your friends?

Later on, once I moved into the higher degrees, another, more experienced Freemason said the same thing, adding, “it is a lonely path, being in these higher degrees.” While I might have doubted before, I did not doubt now. I have seen too many things go awry to question that wisdom. My quandary, though, was trying to figure out what the difference between Freemason and Friend is all about? Why can’t a Brother also be a Friend? Why shouldn’t a Brother be a Friend? How do I communicate that to others, who have stumbled into some awkward and emotionally disturbing situations? How do I avoid them, too?

Let me preface this with saying that this discovery, this understanding between friend and brother, has been a long journey. I have learned a lot about myself, as Freemasonry is wont to provide to a person on its path. I am the type of person who tries to have a pleasant demeanor and be welcoming. Call it being a Libra, a caretaker, eldest daughter, or whatever you will; my personality is to bring in as much hospitality as possible with my attitude, thoughts, and feelings so as to create a circle of warmth, trust, and authenticity. I feel it’s the only way to communicate well with people, and how I want people to communicate well with me. Being open gives me insight into who they are. Many people mistake this for friendship; I think in general, people from the United States mistake quite a bit for friendship, but that might be a topic for another time. Being nice does not equate to friendship. Being nice is, well, simply being nice. I have had this issue all my life and it’s something I understand about myself. While I attempt to be clear, I sometimes do not see the forest for the trees. I struggle to see how being nice may cause misunderstanding. Let’s call it knowledgeable naivete.

A friend is someone who you have created a bond with, someone with whom you know and have a mutual affection. Someone once said to me, you win friends. They are created through experiences of trust, sharing, and having someone with which is common. You might or might not provide some kind of support for a friend; it might be emotional, mental, or physical support.

Different friends have different levels of engagement and meaning. A friend might be someone with whom you share events throughout your life or someone with whom you only share coffee once in a while. There are no expectations in overall friendship; each relationship creates its own boundaries and ways of thinking and being together. In Europe, acquaintances are not friends. You may know someone for 20 years, but they are not your friend. They are someone you know. We have less distinction about that here in the United States. We rely a lot more on others who tell us what we should be. Friends are necessary for everyone; they provide us a window to the world and an ear to speak to when we need that confidant, that supporter, that person who knows us best.

A Brother is very different. While we choose our Brothers in Freemasonry, it’s a very democratic and discussion-heavy process. Brother, it should be clear, is a title. It may mean a fellow Freemason, but it is also a title of someone who is a Freemason. For someone to become a Brother, there is a lengthy and stringent process, where the requirements are spelled out based on the Masonic organization or body. For example, one has to be just, upright, and free, of mature age, sound mind, and strict morals. They don’t have to meet my morality; they have to demonstrate a morality that upholds the tenets of Freemasonry – for example tolerance and prudence. As a Freemason who makes a judgement about an applicant, I can say with authority that this isn’t a popularity contest: the applicant must meet the criteria and the majority of the Lodge members agree to the membership. While it’s nice to have people get along, it is certainly not a requirement unless something is seriously disharmonious. Some Masonic groups do not admit the other gender, or some do not admin non-Christians. Whatever the rules are about entrance, they are tightly controlled by the overarching organization.

In my opinion, the more diverse the group of Freemasons, the better the growth of the human and humanity. What better way to gain a better understanding of the self than to rub up against those people with whom we don’t particularly fit well? Think… rock tumbler. We like to think we have no rough edges but all rocks in a tumbler are pokey. If you catch on someone else, it’s not because your surface is super smooth. You have bumps, like we all do. That is how we get better. By working them out. We’ll talk more about this later.

Selecting who becomes a Brother is only one part of answering the question, what is the difference between Brother and Friend? The second comes from repeatedly working in Lodge together as Freemasons. Human beings are normally drawn to one another as they perceive common interests. In Freemasonry, many Brothers travel together or offer their homes for visits and boarding. In the outer world, the non-Masonic world, this indicates or implicates friendship. For someone who is not clear about their Masonic boundaries, this kind of interaction can be misconstrued. Being nice isn’t being a friend; being nice in Freemasonry is expected and hospitable. Conversely, as I noted above, agreeing with someone isn’t a requirement to be or remain a Freemason. We all don’t have the same thoughts, same views, nor would we want to. Debate and rhetoric are things which create better humans, and Freemasons value the well-informed, opinionated debate. If you can’t discuss topics of importance with your Brothers, then you may not have success as a Freemason. In other words, disagreement or debate isn’t cause for hate or strife. It’s a cause for growth.

Rock. Tumbler.

There is a code of conduct that Freemasons have in interacting with one another that is fairly formal and is intact whether they are in a Lodge meeting or out in public or at a non-Masonic event. No Freemason would dream of striking another physically, calling names to them or their families, or treating them with anything but human decency. There is a respect for them as a human being but even more so, they have earned respect because they have the title Brother. There is also a respect for the hard work someone has put into their Masonic Order, whether it be from years of service, traveling to instruct or mentor, hours of meetings and committees, or other volunteer time. There is a respect of position, formally granted by the Lodge to that person who must spend their time coordinating, planning, instructing, and fostering further Masonic influence, as well as that Lodge’s officers who carry out the work. There’s respect for memorization, degree work, and one hopes, for the execution of the ritual. All of these require a sense of honor for fellow Brothers and a real dedication to support what they do, even if we don’t want to, can’t, or are not able to do it ourselves. We respect merit and ability. This respect is backed up by rules and regulations that demand respect, and a jurisprudence that enforces those rules.

I think this is where the waters become muddy. In the non-Freemasonic world, we bestow respect by our own credo. We win friends by living by our own ideals and sometimes we compromise those ideals for the benefit of having those around us who share our proclivities. We tend to choose our friends because they think like us, not because they think differently. We choose friends with our egos, generally. In a society that is increasingly polarizing, we need our armies around us to make us feel better. In a society that increasingly insular, we mistake the slightest hint of personal niceness as being hit on or being courted for, well, becoming a courtier. It can’t be stated enough that we don’t bring the outside world into Freemasonry and expect it to adapt. Likewise, we shouldn’t misconstrue the hospitality and fraternity of Freemasonry for friendship.

As you move through the path that is Freemasonry, your responsibilities, duties, and obligations become greater, wider reaching. Your duty grows, and your mind must be set to think of not only your own Lodge but your District, your Grand District, and perhaps your entire Order; it may even grow so far as to be responsible for the growth of Freemasonry itself. While a true, authentic friend would never ask you to compromise your avocation for them specifically, it places everyone in a precarious balance if you mix responsibility, duty, and obligation with going out for a few beers on a Saturday night with a single Brother. One has to be very careful where one boundary ends and another begins. How one comports themselves is in direct relation to how they have obligated themselves to a position within Freemasonry.

The largest and most difficult challenge is being “friends” with people early in your Masonic career and then weighing that with greater obligations as you grow. As we change, sometimes our friends do not. Maybe we don’t go out for beers any longer but stay home and enjoy a good study group online. There may be a bitterness about placing Freemasonry above friendship. There might be sadness because you spend time with a Lodge instead of a single person. I know of one person who became the head of their local Lodge. When that happened, people flocked to her to place them in positions of seeming importance in the Lodge, offices they desired. She succumbed to putting them in these positions and the Lodge suffered because of it because they weren’t equipped to do the jobs they desired; she thought of their desires and not the needs of the group. Friendship above Freemasonry. She learned a valuable lesson that first year.

In some cases, maybe you never were friends and simply Brothers, but that is where the niceties and hospitality of Freemasonry confuse with the outside world. When you first enter into Freemasonry, maybe you are looking for friends or even family. You might be looking for those like-minded people and hope for friendship. Going and getting coffee and talking about esoteric subjects may be something you do with friends or with Brothers; it is the building of the relationship, and context, that makes the difference. It is not impossible to be a friend with a Brother – not by a long shot. Yet, what I see work is when Freemasonry is the basis of the relationship and that takes precedence. I can think of many instances where the reverse does not work.

In Co-Masonry, there is the added, extra challenge of mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, and other family members becoming Freemasons, sometimes in the same Lodge. This seems to take the modern familial relationship and make it even better. You have the common purpose of becoming better people, together, with a deeper grasp on your relationship. Perhaps it is because that “friendship” relationship never existed between siblings or parents – after all, it’s family. It was family first, even if the adults are friends, too. Freemasonry, in its familial format, supports those ideas and relationships deeply and helps them, in my opinion, become richer. I have seen whole families join Freemasonry and it creates a very strong, lifelong bond.

I have seen more than a few people who have given their entire adult lives to helping Freemasonry grow, and it is not an easy path. They are on the phone from 6:00 to 18:00, backed up in emails and meetings, planning and executing all the time. If they are lucky, they are able to carve out time for family and some close friends, some travel, and laughter. They have raised families who were nearly all Freemasons and have maybe raised some who were bitter about Freemasonry’s influence. Some have worked for decades to improve the lives of all Freemasons, with no thought to their own service or sleep. It is all a choice, and that sacrifice can be as hard as those that give up their individual lives to raise a family or a flock of parishoners. For these dedicated few, they have very few friends but many, many Brothers. For them, that is satisfying and healthy, and it helps them create the True, the Good, and the Beautiful in the world.

So, Friends? Or Brothers?

Obligation in Modernity

Obligation in Modernity

Freemasonry is built on the idea of obligating yourself to perform certain tasks, with a specific set of goals in mind. The word “obligation” comes from the roots of Middle English, from the verb “oblige,” which means to formally legally or morally bind someone to a promise. North Americans are used to hearing the phrase “much obliged,” in a sort of archaic sense, which means “to be indebted or grateful.” This is a derivation of the word; the more archaic form, from where the word “obligation” comes from is “to bind (someone) by an oath, promise, or contract.” The current 21st century definition is “an act or course of action to which a person is morally or legally bound; a duty or commitment.”

The most common obligation people run into is that of marriage. Divorce rates in the United States are down, possibly because marriage rates are also down. A shift? What about other obligations we make during our lives, especially the ones to ourselves? Upwards of 25% of current high school Freshmen will never complete high school. College drop out rates are the highest they have ever been, even with the highest enrollments ever. Even fraternal and social groups suffer from those who start and, for whatever reason, drop out.

To be fair, there are many reasons for giving up the path; financial, health, and family issues may cause problems for the student or spouse. Yet, we find little effort being made to surmount those challenges; we see the heroes as ones who complete school against all odds – but those odds are sometimes no greater than odds we all face. Everyone has challenges in their life. Completing or dedicating yourself to an endeavor takes will and strength, a desire to go against the easy life and really work hard to achieve your own success, whatever that might be. In an age of “Alexa” and “Siri,” doing things for yourself is seen as too much effort.

Molecular Thoughts

People who choose an esoteric path have put themselves on an extremely hard working journey. It’s not easy. As Buddha said, “life is suffering.” Enlightenment is not found in simple meditation. Physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual work are all necessary. Freemasonry, an esoteric and mystery path built on the foundations of “operative masonry,” is perhaps the epitome of working esoterically and externally.

An excellent article on the “Obligations of a Freemason” can be found on Pietre-Stones. In this article, the author expounds on the obligations of the individual as well as the collective. As Freemasonry is an “individual path worked in a group/collective,” it’s very right that we also look at not only what our obligations to ourselves but also to the group. In fact, from the very onset, in our application, we are promising certain actions that are considered obligatory.

Why all this emphasis on obligation, promises, and commitment? Is there some deeply esoteric meaning in obligating yourself to someone or something? Perhaps.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” ~ (John 1:1)

Much has been said about the divine logos, or, according to the Greeks, “The One Great Reason.” It’s representative of the unseen force of the universe that links us all together, whether we call it God, Love, the Divine, the Force, or whatever. Our ideas about “the Word,” and I suspect John’s as well, came from the Greek philosophers – Heraclitus, Plato, and Epictetus. Where Plato defined logos as an archetype, an idea representation of the divine in an independent-of-physical world, the Stoics refined the idea of logos to impart to it an active principle, and one which incorporated “the Reason” for all being into the function of “The Word.” It’s clear that The writer of the Gospel of John, as well as Buddhists, Jews, Taoists and others have also integrated this idea of the logos into the active Divine in the function of speaking the Word.

The divine Logos is the divine purpose, plan, or word that is the ultimate reason for the cosmos, which orders the universe and gives it meaning. That is, the sound or word has meaning, weight, in creation. As noted above, the Stoics defined logos as the law of generation in the Universe, which was the principle of the active reason working in inanimate matter. Humans, too, each possess a portion of the divine logos. That is, we humans, through our actions and words have generative power. The act of committing ourselves, or creating a binding agreement to complete work has power over us, either consciously or subconsciously. It also has the power to affect other individuals and other groups. This is a ripple effect; what we achieve has a lasting effect on the world around us, and flows out from us in a physical and metaphysical wave.

LOGOS-GreekThus, in giving our “word” or “bond,” we are creating. We create not only the superficial matter – such as our place in a Lodge or our status as spouse in a marriage, but we are creating an unseen, immaterial ripple that will create an effect throughout time. We create – it’s what humans do – and through our words, we create more than just simple relationships. Each word is a spoken manifestation of divinity.

Thus, promises, obligations, and commitments have weight – perhaps even more weight than we realize – when it comes to our overall spiritual life. It is important that we chose and use them carefully.

It’s funny that some individuals see their obligations as infringements on their time, or resources, or futures; funny because most, if not all commitments, promises, and obligations are solely made as the choice of the individual.  We think the promise we make to ourselves and others is somewhat disposable, minimal, with little effect on others and perhaps not even ourselves. Divorce and breakups, broken familial relationships and school dropouts – these are the failures of not understanding ourselves and our words. Failure is always an option and do-overs are necessary – but in order to achieve relief from the suffering, we have to be willing to be honest with ourselves. Pain is inevitable, and suffering doesn’t arise from pain but from our resistance to it – from our resistance to honesty and careful thought; it comes from our resistance to speak “the Word.”

I’ll leave you with a quote from a children’s fantasy book, one which understands and captures the essence of “the Word” in a very real sense – The Wizard of Earthsea.

“It is no secret. All power is one in source and end, I think. Years and distances, stars and candles, water and wind and wizardry, the craft in a man’s hand and the wisdom in a tree’s root: they all arise together. My name, and yours, and the true name of the sun, or a spring of water, or an unborn child, all are syllables of the great word that is very slowly spoken by the shining of the stars. There is no other power. No other name.”
― Ursula K. Le GuinA Wizard of Earthsea

What was the Diet of Worms, and how does it relate to Freemasonry?

What was the Diet of Worms, and how does it relate to Freemasonry?

In 1521, an Imperial Council, referred to as a “Diet,” was convened at Worms, a city situated on the Rhine River in Germany.  This assembly was called by Holy Roman Emperor Charles V to consider the growing crisis caused by the Reformation, particularly Martin Luther’s instrumental role in igniting the movement and promoting his protest against the Catholic Church.

Europe was in a state of transition in the first decades of the 16th century as the revolutionary philosophies of the Renaissance had brought many of the accepted practices and beliefs of the Church into question. The Holy Royal Empire was ruled by the Emperor and Path_of_Luther_Mapthe Pope, creating a joint spiritual and political leadership structure. Emperors were elected by a majority vote of four secular and three ecclesiastical princes. Frederick the Wise, ruler of Germany, was one of the secular princes who voted in favor of Charles V.

When the Papacy moved to silence Luther, Frederick provided protection to Luther and insisted that the Professor be given the opportunity to respond to the charges on German soil, surrounded by political forces which were sympathetic to his cause.

Martin Luther’s Stand

Martin Luther was an ordained priest in the Catholic Church and a Professor of Biblical Interpretation at the University of Wittenberg in Germany. In 1517, he wrote “95 Theses of Contention” and nailed the document to the door of the Wittenberg Church. The list of theses condemned the Catholicluther hammers 95 theses church door of wittenberg Church on a variety of charges including the practice of selling “indulgences” for the forgiveness of sins. As a priest he had become disillusioned with the Catholic doctrine of salvation as laypersons could only obtain salvation through good works and the purchase of indulgences.

An “indulgence” was a certificate that had been signed by the Pope which pardoned a person’s sins and promised the individual access to heaven. One could also purchase indulgences for dead relatives to relieve them of their sins and free them from Purgatory. Luther vehemently opposed the concept of purchasing salvation, radically arguing that salvation required no intermediary papal authority to act as an agent between God and man. Moreover, Luther believed that the Bible was the written word of God and should be the primary source of God’s wisdom on Earth.

The Diet of Worms

On April 16, 1521, Martin Luther was called before the Diet to testify and respond to the charge of heresy. The council members of the Diet urged him to recant his beliefs, renounce his writings, and affirm the Catholic teachings regarding salvation. He spent the night before he would deliver his final response in contemplation, praying to God, “Behold me prepared to lay down my life for thy truth… suffering like a lamb. For the cause is holy; it is thine own.”LutherTestifyingThe following morning Luther stood fast in his truth, which he saw as God’s will. He refused to yield to considerable pressure, instead he reaffirmed his writings and stated beliefs. He concluded his testimony by stating, “I stand convicted by the Scriptures to which I have appealed, and my conscience is taken captive by God’s word. I cannot and will not recant anything, for to act against our conscience is neither safe for us, nor open to us. On this I take my stand. I can do no other. God help me.”

The Outcome

In response, the assembly issued the Edict of Worms on May 25, 1521, which declared Luther should be cast out of the empire, as well as, excommunicated from the Catholic Church. The Edict was never fulfilled as Martin Luther was protected by Frederick the Wise and continued to live in Germany. The professor went on to publish the first translation of the New Testament of the Bible in German in September of 1522 and published the first German translation of the entire bible in the 1530s. The invention of the printing presLuthersBibles allowed Luther the capability to spread his theology in writing across the empire and ultimately lead to the widespread public reading of the Bible with his publishing of the translated German text. The Diet and Edict of Worms catalyzed the growing Protestant reformation, which led to a schism within Christianity.

In the 21st century, Pope Francis affirmed Luther’s reasoning of relying on one’s conscience as means of achieving salvation. When asked to respond to whether God’s mercy is open to atheists, Pope Francis wrote, “God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience. In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or evil. The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.” Following this logic, Luther’s decision to stand firm in his beliefs, convicted by his own conscience, was ultimately justified by the head of the Catholic Church.

Duty and Freemasonry

What is duty? The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines duty as, “a moral or legal obligation.” Thus, duty is what we morally or legally are obliged to do. It is a responsibility toStatue_of_Martin_Luther act in a manner that is in accordance with our morality and our obligations in life. Martin Luther was convinced that he had a duty to God and mankind to spread God’s truth. He began his 95 theses with the preamble, “Out of love for the truth and desire to bring it to light…”

Once convinced of the righteousness of his beliefs, he stood firm against intense pressure from the Church and the Roman Empire. He was so sure of his truth that he accepted excommunication and severe restrictions on his personal liberty. When Frederick the Wise arranged the Diet of Worms, how easy would it have been for Luther to acquiesce to the Council’s request that he disavow his stated beliefs? He could have stopped his excommunication from the Church and protected himself from banishment from the Empire. Yet, he did his duty. He stood firm in his truth and changed the course of history. How many today would risk such dire consequences to demonstrate our faith in God and our charity to man?

Freemasonry teaches that we have a duty to God and mankind. We are instructed to live honorably, to speak truth, to practice justice, to love our neighbor, to serve God, and to work to the betterment of humanity. To do our duty regardless of the consequence is not always easy, but it is the task we are obligated to accomplish.