Dare To Know!
A Confirmation Of Kant's Call For Enlightenment
By
The Man Who Saw God Face To Face
Raphael Okechukwu Nweze
How To Seek And Know The Truth, And Find God
Over the years, the teeming congregations have been taught so many religious pieties, which they devotedly practice out of ignorance. Both the religious leaders and followers have persistently neglected the ancient paths of life, which paths are tested, proven and unchanging: the path of selflessness, the path of self-knowledge, the path of devotion, the path of meditation, the path of study, the path of moderation and the path of praises. Today, many keep themselves busy praying rounds of the rosary, engaging in series of penance, following routines of sacrifice, submitting to years of trainings in the seminaries and convents, observing devotion to images and practicing ‘the hypocrisy called worship.’ How come the religious leaders have turned themselves into imposters and hypocrites, teaching what they have not experienced?
To find God, you must turn inwards, in quietness, in silence and in meditation. Turn your attention away from everything that surrounds you. Turn inwards, towards your inner life. Keep your mind away from the cares and worries of everyday routine. Relax yourself. Keep quiet for a while. This is the first demand of being born again. At the beginning, it may seem impossible. The mind would seem to be restless, making you think of this and that, even when you do not want to think about them. Do not worry. Just continue to do the practice, at least 30 minutes a day. Spiritual growth takes place at a slow and steady pace, as if nothing is being done. Yet, much is being achieved.
The one major task in the life of everyone is to discover the Primordial, Absolute First Principle, called God. He is not just sitting down in the heaven looking for someone to frighten or punish. He is everywhere waiting for His children to find Him. All the while, the potentials of computer have been in nature waiting for people to recognize the need and how to make and operate computer. It was not humanity that developed computer. It has been in existence all the time. Man only realized the need and how to make it functional. So it is with finding God.
The reason why people do not find Him is because of spiritual blindness (ignorance) and indolence (laziness). Many are busy talking about their religion as being the best and final, whereas the religions suppose to lead people to the Truth. They demonstrate the parable of ignorant travelers, who were on a journey to a destination. On the way, they found a signpost to the destination, and then settled down round the signpost, saying, “We have reached the destination.” To overlook the ancient paths is like refusing to go home, for there is no alternative way.
What compound the problem are the religious leaders, most of whom are ignorant of spiritual realities of life. They are Masters at Morality, but Novices at Spirituality, even without knowing that life in spirit is a different ball game. Jesus said that since the time of John the Baptist, the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force. Likewise, since the time of Adam, the kingdom of heaven suffers negligence and the spiritually blind leaders mislead the ignorant multitudes. Even so, today! That is why nations quarrel among themselves, in defense of their respective religions, when indeed, they do not even know the God they worship.
When you are ready for the Truth that is Life, you must abandon the notion of religions, churches, cultures, nationalities and discriminations, for these things are hindrances on the way to the Truth. You must adopt a humble, simple and natural approach to life.
That means that you must become open-minded and honest in everyday routine. Until you do so, your claims of being righteous or religious is nothing but hypocrisy, for no one can give what he has not and nobody can teach what he does not know. What a person has not experienced, that he does not know.
Have you ever heard of a religious founder who did not first seek God in quietness before he found Him? Moses was often alone in the wilderness with cattle. Daniel was frequently alone in prayer. Jesus was often in the wilderness to commune with God. Buddha spent many hours in silent meditation before he became spiritually enlightened. Zoroaster stayed about thirty years in meditation before he gained knowledge of God. John the Baptist lived alone in quietness in the wilderness to know and serve God. Krishna of the Hinduism was a master of meditation, in silence and solitude. Mohammed received the Quran, which was handed down to him, alone. So, how can peoples of the world boast about their religions and claim to know and worship God, when each does not observe quiet times? Verily, I say to you that many are hypocrites.
This does not mean that everybody should become a hermit. No. that is not necessary. God wants you to experience Him in your house, at the office, on the road, inside yourself and outside everywhere, just as you experience the goodness and brightness of the sunlight everywhere you find yourself. This is the simple Truth. That is why Newton did not learn about the gravitation from a university, and he did not need anybody to teach him about the seven colours of the rainbow. Similarly, Galileo did not spend his days in humiliation to know that the sun is outside the earth.
The Ancient Paths
They may appear irrelevant.
At first, they seem to be boring.
Later, they become delightful.
In the beginning, each would seem to be unnecessary,
but with time, it proves to be the right way,
being the same ancient paths of the saints.
Other ways of worship are like the tempest,
that carries a ship away from its route,
while yourself is the gate of heaven.
And the populace chooses the false ways,
because people love ignorance and indolence,
preferring negligence to sincerity.
Today, many of the religions and churches
have become like a blind man in a dark room,
looking for a black hat, which is not therein.
All because they follow the imaginations of their hearts,
the fabrications of falsehood,
and the deceptions of the enemy.
Indeed, many have become stagnant
and complacent,
even without knowing it.
"What Is Enlightenment?"
By
Immanuel Kant,
Edited By
The Man Who Saw God Face To Face
In this 1784 essay, Kant challenged readers to “dare to know,” arguing that it was not only a civic but also a moral duty to exercise the fundamental freedoms of thought and expression. It is also a spiritual duty, which is both necessary and compulsory. Below, I present anew Kant's essay, with relevant modifications.
Original Copy By Kant
Enlightenment is man’s leaving his self-caused immaturity. Immaturity is the incapacity to use one's intelligence without the guidance of another. Such immaturity is self-caused if it is not caused by lack of intelligence, but by lack of determination and courage to use one's intelligence without being guided by another. Sapere Aude! [Dare to know!] Have the courage to use your own intelligence! is therefore the motto of the enlightenment.
Through laziness and cowardice a large part of mankind, even after nature has freed them from alien guidance, gladly remain immature. It is because of laziness and cowardice that it is so easy for others to usurp the role of guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor! If I have a book which provides meaning for me, a pastor who has conscience for me, a doctor who will judge my diet for me and so on, then I do not need to exert myself. I do not have any need to think; if I can pay, others will take over the tedious job for me. The guardians who have kindly undertaken the supervision will see to it that by far the largest part of mankind, including the entire 'beautiful sex,' should consider the step into maturity, not only as difficult but as very dangerous.
After having made their domestic animals dumb and having carefully prevented these quiet creatures from daring to take any step beyond the lead-strings to which they have fastened them, these guardians then show them the danger which threatens them, should they attempt to walk alone. Now this danger is not really so very great; for they would presumably learn to walk after some stumbling. However, an example of this kind intimidates and frightens people out of all further attempts.
It is difficult for the isolated individual to work himself out of the immaturity which has become almost natural for him. He has even become fond of it and for the time being is incapable of employing his own intelligence, because he has never been allowed to make the attempt. Statutes and formulas, these mechanical tools of a serviceable use, or rather misuse, of his natural faculties, are the ankle-chains of a continuous immaturity. Whoever threw it off would make an uncertain jump over the smallest trench because he is not accustomed to such free movement. Therefore there are only a few who have pursued a firm path and have succeeded in escaping from immaturity by their own cultivation of the mind.
But it is more nearly possible for a public to enlighten itself: this is even inescapable if only the public is given its freedom. For there will always be some people who think for themselves, even among the self-appointed guardians of the great mass who, after having thrown off the yoke of immaturity themselves, will spread about them the spirit of a reasonable estimate of their own value and of the need for every man to think for himself. It is strange that the very public, which had previously been put under this yoke by the guardians, forces the guardians thereafter to keep it there if it is stirred up by a few of its guardians who are themselves incapable of all enlightenment. It is thus very harmful to plant prejudices, because they come back to plague those very people who themselves (or whose predecessors) have been the originators of these prejudices. Therefore a public can only arrive at enlightenment slowly. Through revolution, the abandonment of personal despotism may be engendered and the end of profit-seeking and domineering oppression may occur, but never a true reform of the state of mind. Instead, new prejudices, just like the old ones, will serve as the guiding reins of the great, unthinking mass.
All that is required for this enlightenment is freedom; and particularly the least harmful of all that may be called freedom, namely, the freedom for man to make public use of his reason in all matters. But I hear people clamor on all sides: Don't argue! The officer says: Don't argue, drill! The tax collector: Don't argue, pay! The pastor: Don't argue, believe! (Only a single lord in the world says: Argue, as much as you want to and about what you please, but obey!) Here we have restrictions on freedom everywhere. Which restriction is hampering enlightenment, and which does not, or even promotes it? I answer: The public use of a man's reason must be free at all times, and this alone can bring enlightenment among men: while the private use of a man's reason may often be restricted rather narrowly without thereby unduly hampering the progress of enlightenment.
I mean by the public use of one's reason, the use which a scholar makes of it before the entire reading public. Private use I call the use which he may make of this reason in a civic post or office. For some affairs which are in the interest of the commonwealth a certain mechanism is necessary through which some members of the commonwealth must remain purely passive in order that an artificial agreement with the government for the public good be maintained or so that at least the destruction of the good be prevented. In such a situation it is not permitted to argue; one must obey. But in so far as this unit of the machine considers himself as a member of the entire commonwealth, in fact even of world society; in other words, he considers himself in the quality of a scholar who is addressing the true public through his writing, he may indeed argue without the affairs suffering for which he is employed partly as a passive member. Thus it would be very harmful if an officer who, given an order by his superior, should start, while in the service, to argue concerning the utility or appropriateness of that command.
He must obey, but he cannot equitably be prevented from making observations as a scholar concerning the mistakes in the military service nor from submitting these to the public for its judgment. The citizen cannot refuse to pay the taxes imposed upon him. Indeed, a rash criticism of such taxes, if they are the ones to be paid by him, may be punished as a scandal which might cause general resistance. But the same man does not act contrary to the duty of a citizen if, as a scholar, he utters publicly his thoughts against the undesirability or even the injustice of such taxes. Likewise a clergyman is obliged to teach his pupils and his congregation according to the doctrine of the church which he serves, for he has been accepted on that condition. But as a scholar, he has full freedom, in fact, even the obligation, to communicate to the public all his diligently examined and well-intentioned thoughts concerning erroneous points in that doctrine and concerning proposals regarding the better institution of religious and ecclesiastical matters. There is nothing in this for which the conscience could be blamed.
For what he teaches according to his office as one authorized by the church, he presents as something in regard to which he has no latitude to teach according to his own preference.… He will say: Our church teaches this or that, these are the proofs which are employed for it. In this way he derives all possible practical benefit for his congregation from rules which he would not himself subscribe to with full conviction. But he may nevertheless undertake the presentation of these rules because it is not entirely inconceivable that truth may be contained in them. In any case, there is nothing directly contrary to inner religion to be found in such doctrines. For, should he believe that the latter was not the case he could not administer his office in good conscience; he would have to resign it. Therefore the use which an employed teacher makes of his reason before his congregation is merely a private use since such a gathering is always only domestic, no matter how large. As a priest (a member of an organization) he is not free and ought not to be, since he is executing someone else's mandate. On the other hand, the scholar speaking through his writings to the true public which is the world, like the clergyman making public use of his reason, enjoys an unlimited freedom to employ his own reason and to speak in his own person. For to suggest that the guardians of the people in spiritual matters should always be immature minors is a nonsense which would mean perpetuating forever existing nonsense.
But should a society of clergymen, for instance an ecclesiastical assembly, be entitled to commit itself by oath to a certain unalterable doctrine in order to perpetuate an endless guardianship over each of its members and through them over the people? I answer that this is quite inconceivable. Such a contract which would be concluded in order to keep humanity forever from all further enlightenment is absolutely impossible, even should it be confirmed by the highest authority through parliaments and the most solemn peace treaties. An age cannot conclude a pact and take an oath upon it to commit the succeeding age to a situation in which it would be impossible for the latter to enlarge even its most important knowledge, to eliminate error and altogether to progress in enlightenment. Such a thing would be a crime against human nature, the original destiny of which consists in such progress. Succeeding generations are entirely justified in discarding such decisions as unauthorized and criminal.
The touchstone of all this to be agreed upon as a law for people is to be found in the question whether a people could impose such a law upon itself. Now it might be possible to introduce a certain order for a definite short period as if in anticipation of a better order. This would be true if one permitted at the same time each citizen and especially the clergyman to make his criticisms in his quality as a scholar.… In the meantime, the provisional order might continue until the insight into the particular matter in hand has publicly progressed to the point where through a combination of voices (although not, perhaps, of all) a proposal may be brought to the crown. Thus those congregations would be protected which had agreed to (a changed religious institution) according to their own ideas and better understanding, without hindering those who desired to allow the old institutions to continue.…
A man may postpone for himself, but only for a short time, enlightening himself regarding what he ought to know. But to resign from such enlightenment altogether either for his person or even more for his descendants means to violate and to trample underfoot the sacred rights of mankind. Whatever a people may not decide for themselves, a monarch may even less decide for the people, for his legislative reputation rests upon his uniting the entire people's will in his own. If the monarch will only see to it that every true or imagined reform (of religion) fits in with the civil order, he had best let his subjects do what they consider necessary for the sake of their salvation; that is not his affair. His only concern is to prevent one subject from hindering another by force, to work according to each subject's best ability to determine and to promote his salvation. In fact, it detracts from his majesty if he interferes in such matters and subjects to governmental supervision the writings by which his subjects seek to clarify their ideas (concerning religion). This is true whether he does it from his own highest insight, for in this case he exposes himself to the reproach: Caesar non est supra grammaticos [Caesar is not above the laws of grammar]; it is even more true when he debases his highest power to support the spiritual despotism of some tyrants in his state against the rest of his subjects.
The question may now be put: Do we live at present in an enlightened age? The answer is: No, but in an age of enlightenment. Much still prevents men from being placed in a position or even being placed into position to use their own minds securely and well in matters of religion. But we do have very definite indications that this field of endeavor is being opened up for men to work freely and reduce gradually the hindrances preventing a general enlightenment and an escape from self-caused immaturity. In this sense, this age is the age of enlightenment and the age of Frederick (the Great)[Frederick II of Prussia].
A prince should not consider it beneath him to declare that he believes it to be his duty not to prescribe anything to his subjects in matters of religion but to leave to them complete freedom in such things. In other words, a prince who refuses the conceited title of being 'tolerant,' is himself enlightened. He deserves to be praised by his grateful contemporaries and descendants as the man who first freed humankind of immaturity, at least as far as the government is concerned and who permitted everyone to use his own reason in all matters of conscience. Under his rule, venerable clergymen could, regardless of their official duty, set forth their opinions and views even though they differ from the accepted doctrine here and there; they could do so in the quality of scholars, freely and publicly. The same holds even more true of every other person who is not thus restricted by official duty. This spirit of freedom is spreading even outside (the country of Frederick the Great) to places where it has to struggle with the external hindrances imposed by a government which misunderstands its own position. For an example is illuminating them which shows that such freedom (public discussion) need not cause the slightest worry regarding public security and the unity of the commonwealth. Men raise themselves by and by out of backwardness if one does not purposely invent artifices to keep them down.
I have emphasized the main point of enlightenment, that is of man's release from his self-caused immaturity, primarily in matters of religion. I have done this because our rulers have no interest in playing the guardian of their subjects in matters of arts and sciences. Furthermore immaturity in matters of religion is not only most noxious but also most dishonorable. But the point of view of a head of state who favors freedom in the arts and sciences goes even farther; for he understands that there is no danger in legislation permitting his subjects to make public use of their own reason and to submit publicly their thoughts regarding a better framing of such laws together with a frank criticism of existing legislation. We have a shining example of this; no prince excels him whom we admire.
Only he who is himself enlightened does not fear spectres when he at the same time has a well-disciplined army at his disposal as a guarantee of public peace. Only he can say what (the ruler of a) free state dare not say: Argue as much as you want and about whatever you want but obey! Thus we see here as elsewhere an unexpected turn in human affairs just as we observe that almost everything therein is paradoxical. A great degree of civic freedom seems to be advantageous for the freedom of the spirit of the people and yet it establishes impassable limits. A lesser degree of such civic freedom provides additional space in which the spirit of a people can develop to its full capacity. Therefore nature has cherished, within its hard shell, the germ of the inclination and need for free thought. This free thought gradually acts upon the mind of the people and they gradually become more capable of acting in freedom. Eventually, the government is also influenced by this free thought and thereby it treats man, who is now more than a machine, according to his dignity.
Reference
From The Philosophy of Kant by Immanuel Kant, translated, edited and introduced by Carl J. Friedrich. Copyright © 1949 and renewed 1977 by Random House, Inc. Used by permission of Random House, Inc.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
New/Edited Copy By Raphael
Enlightenment is man’s leaving his self-constructed prison of ignorance, for no one holds man, but himself. Man is ignorant because he continues to ignore the truth about life. The problem has been compounded by indolence, man's choice of stagnation and complacency. Spiritual ignorance is not lack of intelligence. It is rather the lack of determination and courage to use one's intelligence without being guided by another. Hence, Dare to know, tells man the same thing as "You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free."
By laziness and cowardice, a large part of mankind have remained spiritually stagnant and complacent. The problem has been worsened by every use of fear in training people, which fear is man-made, and unnecessary in the spirit realm. Therefore, spiritual growth, which takes place best at balance-point (equilibrium), has been skewed into a practice of honouring the saints and at the same time belittling oneself. Humility is neither self-belittlement nor self-denial. The same is true about simplicity.
Again, neither humility nor simplicity is poverty, as people have been made to believe. God does not want His people to live a wretched life, as if suffering is the key to the kingdom of heaven, which kingdom is a free gift to the children of God. Though, there have been persecutions here and there, which persecutions were all man-made, out of ignorance and selfishness.
Mankind uses formal education to train the new generations, endeavouring to develop and sustain civilization. At the same time, humanity have used the same education to suppress the power of independent thinking of the individuals. In the process, learning became a kind of cramming, instead of being guided reasoning. The effect is worst felt among undeveloped nations, who have been described as lacking problem-solving mentality. The situation is like the case of a medical doctor who went to treat a patient, but ended up giving a wrong drug that killed the patient, without the society knowing what actually happened. Just as an over-caring mother would not allow his baby any movement, because she does not want the baby to suffer any bruises.
The truth is that the danger is not really so very great as it usually seems to the novice and fearful. For it is natural that many would presumably learn to walk after some stumbling, just as mistakes are the stepping stones to mastery, and as failures are the foundations of true success. That indeed is experience, which is the best teacher. However, wrong preaching intimidate and frighten people out of all further attempts.
It is now difficult for the individual believer to work himself out of the prison of ignorance, which has become almost natural to him. He has even become fond of it, by counting on his self-righteousness, without knowing that he is stagnant and complacent. Jesus did not mince words when He said it clearly, 15 "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. 17 Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing' - and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked - 18 I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see."
Revelation 3:15-19
For the time being, the ordinary man is incapable of employing his own intelligence, because he has never been allowed to make the attempt. He considers it a sin to do so, contrary to the fact that God ordained the universal law of challenge, by which man is endowed to question whatever he does not understand. Many of the children of God have become like a deceived fellow, who went in search of his father. At last, he found his father, a rich and honest man. But the fellow would not enter the man's house, saying, “This rich man is a thief and a wicked man.”
It is disappointing that today many of the religious teachings and practices are the ankle-chains of a continuous self-imprisonment, fostered by the ignorant leaders who steadily feed on and manipulate the ignorance of the masses. Moreover, whoever would throw off such teachings and practices, would make an uncertain jump over the smallest trench because he is neither accustomed to nor trained to undertake such free movement. Only a few have taken extra steps in search of the truth by following the same ancient and unchanging paths of life. They have become the living saints among the others.
Now, the world is in a period of great awakening. Both great and minor changes are coming. As always the case, people would first reject or doubt new teachings, insisting on doing things the old way, until after a long period of time, after a few have tasted the rejected apples and confirmed the fruits as being good and not bad. Therefore, the general public can only arrive at enlightenment slowly. By then, it is so unfortunate, that many might have ended up in the hell fire. Besides, care must be taken, to avoid new prejudices arising, just like the old ones, which serve as the misguiding reins of the great, unthinking masses.
To tell you the simple truth, the religious leaders must turn to spirit and prophecy before they can lead the numerous flocks to the waters of life. That also means educational training in at least elementary Godliness (Mysticism, Spirituality, Metaphysics, Astrology, Horoscope, etc), the very areas of life that religious leaders have consistently and continuously shied away from. The turn around is inevitable, for man is made a king of the universe and a master of the great ocean of life. He must begin to make attempts, if he must return home, for he has truly
inherited greatness from God, who loves him so much as to have created him in God's image and likeness - God's own nature.
All that is required for this homeward journey called enlightenment is freedom; especially, the freedom for man to make public use of his reason in all matters and private practise of spiritual science: the freedom to investigate issues, to question doctrines, to confirm scriptures, to think anew, to stay alone at quiet times, to meditate on God and life, to worship God only, to search for the truth and to venture into the spirit realms. Unfortunately, most of the religions and churches are not yet ready for this kind of orientation.
The current situation is vividly expressed by Kant thus, "But I hear people clamor on all sides: Don't argue! The officer says: Don't argue, drill! The tax collector: Don't argue, pay! The pastor: Don't argue, believe! (Only a single lord in the world says: Argue, as much as you want to and about what you please, but obey!) Here we have restrictions on freedom everywhere. Which restriction is hampering enlightenment, and which does not, or even promotes it? I answer: The public use of a man's reason must be free at all times, and this alone can bring enlightenment among men: while the private use of a man's reason may often be restricted rather narrowly without thereby unduly hampering the progress of enlightenment."
... For some affairs which are in the interest of the commonwealth a certain mechanism is necessary through which some members of the commonwealth must remain purely passive in order that an artificial agreement with the government for the public good be maintained or so that at least the destruction of the good be prevented. In such a situation it is not permitted to argue; one must obey. But in so far as this unit of the machine considers himself as a member of the entire commonwealth, in fact even of world society; in other words, he considers himself in the quality of a scholar who is addressing the true public through his writing, he may indeed argue without the affairs suffering for which he is employed partly as a passive member. Thus it would be very harmful if an officer who, given an order by his superior, should start, while in the service, to argue concerning the utility or appropriateness of that command.
He must obey, but he cannot equitably be prevented from making observations as a scholar concerning the mistakes in the military service nor from submitting these to the public for its judgment. The citizen cannot refuse to pay the taxes imposed upon him. Indeed, a rash criticism of such taxes, if they are the ones to be paid by him, may be punished as a scandal which might cause general resistance. But the same man does not act contrary to the duty of a citizen if, as a scholar, he utters publicly his thoughts against the undesirability or even the injustice of such taxes. Likewise a clergyman is obliged to teach his pupils and his congregation according to the doctrine of the church which he serves, for he has been accepted on that condition. But as a scholar, he has full freedom, in fact, even the obligation, to communicate to the public all his diligently examined and well-intentioned thoughts concerning erroneous points in that doctrine and concerning proposals regarding the better institution of religious and ecclesiastical matters. There is nothing in this for which the conscience could be blamed.
But should a society of clergymen, for instance an ecclesiastical assembly, be entitled to commit itself by oath to a certain unalterable doctrine in order to perpetuate an endless guardianship over each of its members and through them over the people? I answer that this is quite inconceivable. But that is exactly what is happening. Such a contract which would be concluded in order to keep humanity forever from all further enlightenment is absolutely impossible, even should it be confirmed by the highest authority through parliaments and the most solemn peace treaties. An age cannot conclude a pact and take an oath upon it to commit the succeeding age to a situation in which it would be impossible for the latter to enlarge even its most important knowledge, to eliminate error and altogether to progress in enlightenment. Such a thing would be a crime against human nature, the original destiny of which consists in such progress. That is the mess religions and churches have plunged humanity into. However, I thank God that the light of Truth is shining brighter and brighter everyday. Many religious, socio-cultural and other man-made institutions, beliefs and practices are going to collapse. This is the timely intervention of the Almighty. The coming changes shall be such that religious leaders cannot prevent or control. Succeeding generations are entirely justified in discarding such decisions as unauthorized and criminal.
... Now it might be possible to introduce a certain order for a definite short period as if in anticipation of a better order. This would be true if one permitted at the same time each citizen and especially the clergyman to make his criticisms in his quality as a scholar.… In the meantime, the provisional order might continue until the insight into the particular matter in hand has publicly progressed to the point where through a combination of voices (although not, perhaps, of all) a proposal may be brought to the crown. Thus those congregations would be protected which had agreed to (a changed religious institution) according to their own ideas and better understanding, without hindering those who desired to allow the old institutions to continue...
A man may postpone for himself, but only for a short time, enlightening himself regarding what he ought to know. But to resign from such enlightenment altogether either for his own person or even more for his descendants means to violate and to trample underfoot the sacred rights of mankind. Whatever a people may not decide for themselves, a monarch may even less decide for the people, for his legislative reputation rests upon his uniting the entire people's will in his own. If the monarch will only see to it that every true or imagined reform (of religion) fits in with the civil order, he had best let his subjects do what they consider necessary for the sake of their salvation; that is not his affair. His only concern is to prevent one subject from hindering another by force, to work according to each subject's best ability to determine and to promote his salvation. In fact, it detracts from his majesty if he interferes in such matters and subjects to governmental supervision the writings by which his subjects seek to clarify their ideas (concerning religion). This is true whether he does it from his own highest insight, for in this case he exposes himself to the reproach: Caesar non est supra grammaticos [Caesar is not above the laws of grammar]; it is even more true when he debases his highest power to support the spiritual despotism of some tyrants in his state against the rest of his subjects. This paragragh is a word enough for the wise.
The question may now be put: Do we live at present in an enlightened age? The answer is: No, but in an age of enlightenment. Much still prevents men from being placed in a position or even being placed into position to use their own minds securely and well in matters of religion. But we do have very definite indications that this field of endeavor is being opened up for men to work freely and reduce gradually the hindrances preventing a general enlightenment and an escape from self-caused imprisonment. In this sense, this age is the age of enlightenment and the age of spiritual awakening, wherein mankind shall begin each to crack his own egg-shell and emerge therefrom into the universal light of the knowledge of the Truth.
I have emphasized the main point of enlightenment, that is of man's release from his self-caused ignorance, primarily in matters of religion. I have done this because our rulers have no interest in playing the guardian of their subjects in matters of arts and sciences. Furthermore ignorance in matters of religion is not only most noxious but also most dishonorable. For it is good to be a believer, but it is a disgrace to be an ignorant believer. But the point of view of a head of state who favors freedom in the arts and sciences goes even farther; for he understands that there is no danger in legislation permitting his subjects to make public use of their own reason and to submit publicly their thoughts regarding a better framing of such laws together with a frank criticism of existing legislation. We have a shining example of this; no prince excels him whom we admire.
Only he who is himself enlightened does not fear spectres when he at the same time has a well-disciplined army at his disposal as a guarantee of public peace. Only he can say what (the ruler of a) free state dare not say: Argue as much as you want and about whatever you want but obey! Thus we see here as elsewhere an unexpected turn in human affairs just as we observe that almost everything therein is paradoxical. A great degree of civic freedom seems to be advantageous for the freedom of the spirit of the people and yet it establishes impassable limits. A lesser degree of such civic freedom provides additional space in which the spirit of a people can develop to its full capacity. Therefore nature has cherished, within its hard shell, the germ of the inclination and need for free thought. This free thought gradually acts upon the mind of the people and they gradually become more capable of acting in freedom. Eventually, the government is also influenced by this free thought and thereby it treats man, who is now more than a machine, according to his dignity.
Reference
From The Philosophy of Kant by Immanuel Kant, translated, edited and introduced by Carl J. Friedrich. Copyright © 1949 and renewed 1977 by Random House, Inc. Used by permission of Random House, Inc.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
How To Get Spiritual And General Enlightenment
Below are relevant books you should read in order to start your own spiritual awakening (Being Born Again).
Spiritual Science and Practice (Life In Spirit And In Truth)
A university graduate showed his result sheet to a mystic. The student had scored 'A' in every course, and graduated with First Class Honours. He was expecting commendations from the mystic. The mystic looked at the result and said, "You have mastered the frivolities, and neglected the most important thing."
"W..h..a..t..?..!" exclaimed the graduate with surprise.
"To the world, you are a master," added the mystic. "But in spirit, you are only a novice."
Know The Truth And Set Yourself Free!
"You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free!" John 8:32
Indeed, you will be amazed when you know the Truth. And reading one holy book is not enough.
Prayer Of Meditation On God
Do you know how to love God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your life? No. Here is the knowledge. "And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart."
Jeremiah 29:23
Everyday Inspiration
Inspiration is the light of knowledge,...and empowerment that radiates from the heart of God to all the living things in creation. Get to know how God speaks to His People.