Car (Computer Age Religion)
Written by Ameya Deshpande
This writing is also available in e-book format DOWNLOAD
Download Adobe Reader to view
the e-book
It is an appeal to every reader, especially atheist and agnostic people to not form any opinions or make any judgments until having read the whole of the writing
Foreword
Welcome, fellow human being! I get a feeling that the very name ‘Computer Age Religion’, especially ‘religion’ in it, is going to bring some raised eyebrows, some smirks and some cynical frowns at the first glance. Generally, the non-religious people are rigidly firm on their stance that we don’t need any religion. And just the same, the religious people, no matter which religion they belong to, are rigidly firm on the belief that no other religion can ever be as good as the religion that they belong to. And if it’s a new religion as such, then leave it alone completely. There is a general perception among people that the older is a set of beliefs, the better and time proven it is. To add to it, Abrahamic religions believe that any new religion is invalid, because their existing religion was the final religion ever, to come from God. In spite of knowing this, I dare to present a new religion, a slightly new set of ideas. This is because, I AM NOT trying to erase off and overwrite on the beliefs of anyone. And secondly, I very firmly believe that anything good is good regardless of whom it has come from and when it has come and thus deserves appreciation and a fair appraisal without any bias.
Here, I’d like to mention that I'm not contending a bit that this way is the only right way. I will never do that. I'm only trying to enunciate a fact, which often gets overlooked - there is something we all are living with - people of all religions, atheists and agnostics, without realizing it. One size never fits all, but to talk in terminology of databases, the ‘foreign key’ of this something is the ‘primary key’ key in each one of us, unless one chooses to delete this key. I call this primary key as faith. Some people find it in God. Some people call it as scrupulous behavior and some call it common sense. In the end it’s the same thing. For example, if you see a stranger belonging to another race, religion and country being taken advantage of and being badly treated by a person of your country belonging to your race and religion, you won't feel that the person doing the injustice is a fellow countryman or is of same the colour like you, so you should support him. You'll find the one foreign key of that something that connects to the primary keys of both, you and the stranger. And you'll go to help him. That’s the faith I'm talking about.
If you see history, you’ll be able to see it very easily that some of the biggest violence ever taken place has been under the name of religion or as an effect of religion related sentiments. Why could this be so, when each religion individually intends to bring people on the path of peace? If you observe each of the religions from a neutral point without any biases and analyze them, then you’ll be able to see some obvious flaws in them – the most prominent one being the belief, “My religion is the only ultimate truth.” Perhaps, these flaws weren’t flaws as such at the time when each of these religions took birth, but in the world of today, the context of the computer age, these are definitely and clearly flaws which need to be eliminated. Car eliminates all of the evident flaws WITHOUT entirely erasing off anything. I have made the structure of Car in form of an operating system. This special structure allows for that. It has a Kernel, a Shell and Tools. All the examples and terminology used is computer related, because that is the language which is best understood in the computer age. I invite you all to read and understand Car and become Car drivers!
1. The problems with existing religions
All the religions existing today have some evident flaws or demerits. It’s these demerits in religions which have caused major historic violence over and over again. Followers of any religion assume that the religion has come directly from God and whatever has come from God but obviously has to be perfect. Once their mind accepts this as an established fact, their mind gets closed then and there and thus they become incapable of seeing and accepting the existing flaws in the religion. I would like to clear one common misunderstanding over here about the terms ‘open mind’ and closed mind’. ‘Open’ doesn’t mean that you have to discard whatever is established or accepted and kick all the rules. It also doesn’t mean accepting whatever is given or presented to you. Being open or having an open mind means being willing to sincerely analyze anything keeping aside existing bias using intelligence, logic, rationality and all analytical abilities you possess and doing a fair appraisal and then accepting the result of the appraisal even if it is contrary to your existing belief. One who isn’t capable of this is said to have a closed mind. Some people are afraid of having an open mind with regards to religion because they are afraid that God may damn them. Think, just think, God who is the perfect, almighty and the most merciful, thus effectively the most intelligent force in this universe, really would want you to have a closed mind? Don’t be afraid, come ahead and analyze. If your existing beliefs stand true in the test of logic, rationality, factuality and intelligence you very well keep them, who’s denying it?
Let’s take a look at the evident demerits of existing religions:
i) Complexity: Many of existing religions try to define every possible situation which a human being may come across in his day to day life ranging from something very trivial to something of grave seriousness. Right from what is ideally to be done when you want to eat food to how to divorce has been defined. It’s okay when things are as basic as this but they start getting difficult when defining goes in deeper levels like what is to be done when you’re washing clothes on the river and your one handed neighbour hits you with a stick and runs away swearing. Remembering so many situations and applying them is a very difficult task. One cannot expect all human beings with varying intelligences to do it with equal efficiency. Moreover, when so many definitions are given, one tends to assume that he cannot use his intellect but apply a situation given in religion directly to the situation in life. And life is full of so many unimaginable possibilities that it’s not possible for religion to contain every possibility and its definition. At such times a person applies something which is not applicable and it becomes unreasonable.
ii) Intolerance: Most religions are highly intolerant. Merriam Webster defines ‘tolerance’ as “sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own”. So you can see, merely by not crushing the beliefs of other people a religion or a person doesn’t become tolerant. It has to show sympathy and indulgence both. For some religion to be tolerant it should permit its followers to interact with the followers of other religion in every possible way humans positively interact. They should be permitted to mix up on all social occasions including some special religious rituals and they should be allowed to get married to each other. Because it’s only by this a person can truly exchange feelings with all segments of society and get close. And if this is not permitted by any particular religion, it’s evident that it’s intolerant.
iii) Lack of a definite framework: Some religions which comparatively show lesser complexity and more tolerance seem to lack a definite framework within which life can traverse. Ideally, a religion should put some proper light on the activities in the day to day life as well and not only focus on how to attain spiritual enlightenment. And that is why religions need adaptation with time so as to be suited to the requirement of the age. And understand this, I’m talking about a framework, not a step by step instructional or a draconian protocol. Because freedom is the most important thing in life. However, it’s strongly felt that the comparatively more tolerant and less complex religions lack a prominent and definite framework.
iv) Assumptive tendency: Religions are very assumptive. They assume things about everything. First and foremost and most importantly, each one of them assumes that what it says is THE ULTIMATE TRUTH. Well, whenever anyone expresses an opinion, it has to be with a self belief that its true. However religions do it with extreme chauvinism. They assume that everything not mentioned explicitly by them or what is different from them is unholy or impious. It’s also is an implied assumption of the teachings of religion that any person who doesn’t believe in or who doesn’t have any faith in God is an evil person. The fact is that everything in life is very subjective. I have known persons, some of them personally, who don’t believe in God but are absolutely wonderful persons and also those who are fully religious but are evil. It’s this assumptive tendency which is largely responsible for the violence that has taken place under the name of religion in world history. This point is further elaborated by this analysis of the findings of extensive research: http://car2008.awardspace.com/religiondeter.htm . While talking to a couple of non-Christian friends when I expressed excitement over coming Christmas, they were really baffled as to why in spite of not being a Christian by birth was I looking forward to Christmas. Because their religion made them assume that whatever is not part of their religion is not a part of the ultimate truth and hence meaningless.
v) Rigidity: While some religions lack a framework as described above, others do have it. But they do not a have a simple framework, instead they have strict rules within this framework which are very rigid. All the followers of a religion are expected to do some particular things at some particular time. For example Muslims are expected not to anything else at the time of prayer and the timings are fixed, they are not permitted to drink even a glass of wine or beer, Christians are expected to go to the church on Sunday, Hindus have to cremate the bodies of the dead. There are no two ways about these rules. Each devout of each religion has to rigidly follow the rules within the framework. If he doesn’t, then religion and consequently or so the religions say, God, is not happy with him. Ideally, a person should have full freedom within a defined framework. I would like to make one thing clear here. I’m not trying to denounce all rules over here. Some certain rules based on intelligent thinking are very much essential to keep everything in order. However, they should be flexible depending upon circumstances, the overall make of a person, his capacity and preferences thus to make life more pleasant for everyone.
vi) Compromise with logic and rationality: These two elements have to be the inherent part of any endeavour and life in general of any person. But a lot of principles, definitions and assumptions in religions don’t appeal to the sense of logic and rationality. Also, whenever one has to follow a particular religion as a fundamentalist then any person with a sound sense of logic and rationality will observe about him time and again that his logic and rationality often go out of the window. Without taking the actual names of any controversial theories I’ll point out that these people enjoy the benefits of modern science and medicine which are the part of the same knowledge pool which has developed over time. It’s just pure logic to see that had one theory been false the other theories which are applied in life and are used by these people in form of medicines and gadgets, would have never come into birth, because they’re the part of the same area of science, same knowledge pool. Moreover, there are proofs and clear evidences that back these theories. But since the logic and rationality of these people are outside the window they just conveniently call these theories as “perverted theories” because religion doesn’t have them.
vii) Direct conflict: In one respect or the other religions have principles or theories which create direct conflict with each other. The moment there is a conflict, a religion contradicts itself. Because this universe is absolute. There are no conflicts in this universe; conflicts are just in the thoughts of people. Because whenever there is an actual conflict somewhere, things stop working. But this universe has never stopped. And so, if there are conflicts within religions then it contradicts its own claim that it’s the absolute truth. The most amazing part is that virtually each of the religion claims, “Only this is the ultimate truth”. Just one word causes the problems – ‘only’. There is no problem at all as long as the claim is, “This is the ultimate truth”. Because, there always can be more than one way to attain anything or reach anywhere. A flight from Mumbai to New York can go via London or Paris or Dubai or all of them. It would be so unreasonable for an airlines company to claim that the true flight from Mumbai to New York goes only through London and that is the only route; all other routes are false. Does it not make more sense to see beyond the picture that is being shown to you since you were a kid and have a tolerant approach? Once you have it you’ll start to give way in to the thoughts that many a times an other religion defines some particular thing better than what your religion does. If not better, you’ll learn to admit that at least the other religion too has a valid definition. And why not, there is more than one way to reach anywhere.
viii) One level: Most of the existing religions work on a single level. The rules are uniform for all the people to follow. In this world the abilities, capacities, emotional make and thinking manners of people are different. It doesn’t necessarily make them evil. Thus it’s quite unfair to drag all of them on a single level and then judge them based on it.
Now I will draw out some of the evident flaws I have noticed in the religions of which I have some understanding:
Hinduism: While this religion is one of the most tolerant religions which believes in being thankful to everything and everyone, it lacks a definite framework regarding many areas in life. A lot or principles seem theoretical only and not very practical to apply as they are in life. Also, many practices in life are based on the conditions and resources available a few thousand years ago, hence they are very crude. For example, the practice of cremation. It’s absolutely horrid to set the body on fire of someone you’ve known as a living person for all your life. To add to it the next day the relatives are expected to go and collect the bones from the ashes. It’s actually, getting rid of the body of the person and his physical image in your mind rather than a farewell. It is not only horrid for the mind but it’s horrid from the environment point of view. Burning the body causes pollution and also makes the nature lose the resources. I’ve seen the best practice in this respect in Islam. Muslims are expected to bury the body of a person and not have a gravestone. Over a period of time, another person is buried at same place. This way, there is no pollution, soil decomposes the body and retains the resources in nature and huge graveyards are not needed as in Christianity.
Islam: The most prominent flaw in Islam I’ve noticed is that it assumes itself to be the last ever religion sent by God Himself. And since this is the last religion there is the claim that “everything that came before it is outdated and everything that’ll come after it is invalid and unrecognized”. Why should anyone take this claim? To back for this, some advocates of this religion claim that all the books of other religions have a mention of giving up their religion and adopting this religion when it comes on the face of the earth. None of the researchers who spend years studying and researching from a non-religious neutral point of view, the original versions of Bible, Gita, Vedas and Zend Avesta have found any such mentions. So then, the above mentioned claim becomes such a chauvinistic thing to do. Another prominent flaw I’ve noticed in this religion is that it considers homosexual people as sinners. It says that people are not born homosexual but they become homosexual due to circumstances, especially at the time of puberty. Evidently, this is not true. I have interviewed several gays and lesbians and I understood some facts. There are many people who are not completely homosexual from the beginning but they indulge into sex with the same sex for experiment. They just have traces of homosexuality. They are referred to as bi-curious. However, this doesn’t constitute the entire population of homosexual people. True homosexuals are those who have felt sexually only towards the same sex since as along as they could remember. They feel the same tender and intense feelings of love towards the same sex that a heterosexual man would feel for a woman or woman would feel for a man. On given the hypothetical situation that suppose God appears in front of them and asks them to give up homosexuality for the rest of their lives and in return they’ll get an assured place in heaven, they couldn’t imagine giving it up and forcibly having sex with the opposite sex. I would like to ask this to heterosexuals, that imagine that God appears in front of you and asks you to quit having sex with the opposite sex for the rest of your life and practice only homosexuality, and in return you’ll get an assured place in heaven, will you be able to do it? I doubt it. It is impossible to over-ride the natural orientation you’re given. And when you couldn’t do it even for a place in heaven, how do you say that someone can ‘become homosexual’? No one is capable of changing his or her natural orientation. So then, why are these people being denounced by calling them sinners?
Christianity: Christ’s message is considered to be the ‘only way to God’. As drawn out above, the word ‘only’ is the root of a conflict. Christianity lacks in addressing properly and sufficiently the situations where one is being taken advantage of or consistent injustice is being done to him. Even in Christianity homosexuals are considered sinners. After death, in Christianity people are buried but they put a gravestone on the grave thus limiting that piece of land to one person which stays forever. So with time acres and acres of land are used as graveyards.
Having discussed the flaws in the religions, it is a must to note that flaws are not all what the religions are made up of. Each religion has some very good, valuable, spiritual and inspiring things which provide good guidance in life and following which can make a person happy and contented. Earlier, I have talked about the fact that followers of any religion believe that the religion has come directly from God and anything that has come from Him has to be perfect. Using the reverse logic we can say that anything that is not perfect hasn’t come directly from God. And we just saw all the evident flaws in the religions. Hence, it becomes obvious that religions DIDN’T COME DIRECTLY FROM GOD. If religions didn’t come directly from God, how are there good things in them? The way I see it, all the good and positive things are stored by God on a server in spiritual world. Enlightened people connect to this server through meditation and download them as much as they can. Some people download one set of things, others download other things. Sometimes a few common things are downloaded. These enlightened people are humans after all and they perceive these good things differently. Then making use of these good things and their own intelligence these people try to form guidelines which are called as religions. In this transition from spiritual to material world a lot of flaws creep into them. However, the good things retrieved from the spiritual world stay too and we must respect them.
Some people try to denounce religions by declaring them to be absolutely worthless, useless and outdated. They also say that religions cause nothing but problems. My view is different as I’ve written above. I believe that something good is good regardless of whom or where it has come from and thus it is to be respected. And good things are timeless. Even if there are flaws in religions they don’t affect the good things and we must keep aside the flaws. We must use our sense of rationality and logic to detect what all is good amidst the flaws and take all that’s the former.
2. What does this call in for?
A lot has been spoken so far about the demerits of all of the existing religions. But where does this lead us to, what does this call in for? This calls in for a religion that eliminates all of the demerits in the existing religions enlisted above and makes use of the good things in them and has some basic simple standards which will make it absolutely easy for anyone to understand and associate with the religion. In this age the lifestyle has changed and people’s behavior has to be adapted to it accordingly. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they are evil people. Thus we need a religion which understands this and yet defines properly the things related to day to life and provides guidelines to the people. If there is any one thing by which this age is most prominently marked by and identified with then it is computers. Computers have revolutionized the life of man in this age and thus this is the computer age. We need a religion that understands the computer age, we need a Car (Computer Age Religion).
3. Other-religions approach
Before we go on to understand Car there is something I want you to develop in yourself. I call it as the ‘other-religions approach’. There are two kinds in the people who follow any religion strictly as it is. Firstly, those who think about all the principles of that religion and how they have an effect on material and spiritual life. They get convinced that this is the religion with best principles and so they follow it. The second type are the ones with herd mentality. Since so many people are following it, they assume that it obviously must be good and that it would be terribly awful not to follow it. But whichever type a person may belong to, there are underlying fears that make him follow that particular religion as it is. Firstly, every person is concerned and worried about the things in day to day life that are beyond his control. For example, you may have worked very hard for your exam, but what if the question-paper gets set for the area you’re weak on? Secondly, every person has a dreadful fear about what happens after death – to himself and his loved ones. They are afraid that if they don’t follow a religion as it is, God will be unhappy with them and they will suffer here and then in the hereafter. I just want you to open your mind and think over this. Every time you feel this way, just get your focus off a limited group, i.e. your own religion and focus on the whole reality – many religions existing on the planet. Just at the time when you are practicing one particular thing or doing it in a particular way to please God, an other group of people, a large group, is doing something else for the same purpose. Do you sincerely believe that they’ll be damned for not doing what you’re doing? Because they think the same way about you. There are mainly 2 types of religions in this world, Abrahamic religions and eastern religions. Abrahamic religions are the ones which recognize a spiritual tradition identified by Abraham and include Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Eastern religions are the ones which evolved in the east and include Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Taoism etc. A fundamentalist follower of each religion believes that in the long run people of his belief are going to benefit and the ones of the other beliefs will suffer. Statistics of the world population of members of different religions show that 33% are into Christianity, 21% are into Islam, 14% are into Hinduism, 13% are non-religious, 6% are into primal-indigenous religions, 6% are into Buddhism, 6% are into traditional Chinese religions and 1% belong to other religions. Now, if you belong to any one religion, a much bigger majority of people are the ones do not belong to your religion. So, if the belief that following your religion as it is will benefit you in the long run and that the people following other religions will suffer, is to be considered true, it means that a majority of people are going to suffer for sure in every case. So is God going to let them suffer? Is this how God is? Come on, don’t kid yourself, God is not a martinet. He is merciful and loving. Moreover, He is the most intelligent force existing in this universe. If He observes that a majority of people in this world are going to suffer will He not take any drastic steps to prevent this? If He is not doing that, it only highlights the fact that this premise that following any one particular religion as it is will save you and those don’t will suffer is a false premise.
Attaining ‘moksha’, freeing yourself from the cycle of life and death or securing a place in the heaven, whatever is your aim for the hereafter, you’re definitely not going to achieve it merely by being a member of your religion. And just the same, being a member of another religion is not going to stop you from it or make you stand in a difficult position to quality for the good. The true criterion for this is how much you’ve achieved your ultimate goal in life. Your ultimate goal in life is ‘to be happy and make others happy’ i.e. in other words – to be a good human being. I have elaborately drawn this out in The Source Code of the Kernel : http://car2008.awardspace.com/kernelsource.htm
And this has been accepted by the world, just that people don’t realize it consciously all the time. How? I will now talk about a few people belonging to different religions. Out of these think about the people who do not belong or belonged to the religion that you belong to and tell me your sincere feelings. I understand that no one has a right to judge other people other than God. However, each person is capable of thinking and I want to know your sincere feelings about this. Do you seriously think that Mother Teresa will be sent to hell for not being a Muslim? Can you say it from your heart that you think Baba Amte and Mahatma Gandhi will go to hell for not being Christians? Do you truly believe that Moinuddin Chishti and Kabir didn’t get ‘moksha’ because they weren’t Hindu? Did Buddha defeat his ultimate purpose in life because he didn’t follow any of these religions? An obvious answer to all the above questions is ‘No’. I understand that world is too large a place and so there are chances that you may not have heard some name out of these. Please search on Google or Wikipedia to understand the stature of these people in the field of service to the mankind.
So now, I would like to ask you, when these people have placed themselves in a very good position to be judged positively, not essentially by following any particular religion but by their positive influence on the world through their actions, why is it so hard for you to believe that the same principle applies to you as well?
At this point, it becomes very essential to discuss what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’. This has been properly explained in The Source Code of the Kernel, however to describe it in short, selfishness is the root of all evil. Any action which has originated by putting others’ happiness ahead of or in par with one’s own happiness is a good noble act. Any action which has originated by putting one’s own happiness ahead of others’ happiness is an evil act. Any act which originates this way or which causes somebody to be deprived of his/her right should strictly be avoided. And when such an act is being done towards you, it should be resisted – first peacefully and still if it continues then severely.
Bottom line: Any one religion as it is, is never the whole picture or the complete truth.
4. Car (Computer Age Religion)
Car is structured in such a way so as to eliminate all of the demerits in existing religions while retaining the good things in them. Car is simple, has complete tolerance towards everything (The only intolerance is towards anything ‘evil’ and what is evil is clearly defined in The Source Code of the Kernel), there is a definite but simple framework to traverse within, it’s non-assumptive, completely flexible, stresses on using logic and rationality, there is no conflict with anything and which provides more than one level.
Elements of Car
i) Conscience: Car believes that God has created every person with a sense of logic and rationality and it continuously speaks to him in form of a conscience telling him what is good for himself and others and all together. It’s only what a person chooses to listen to and not to listen to decides what actions he takes.
ii) Mankind: Car believes in thinking about the benefit in the long run of mankind instead of being limited to any group, sect or country. The prime allegiance of every Car driver should be towards humanity. Car understands and respects diversity and variation. Humanity is scattered over the earth and based on the geographic and climatic conditions and historical background, the culture, traditions and customs vary from place to place. Just because some group is different it doesn’t necessarily mean that they are inferior, wrong or evil. There are certain things common to the entire mankind, like emotions, dreams, ambitions, wishes, etc. and as long as one particular person or group doesn’t defeat the purpose of existence of the other he/it has every right to be in the way it is.
iii) One God: Car believes completely in the existence of God. The existence of God has been logically proved in The Source Code of the Kernel. There is one governing positive force in this universe. An apple is called as ‘apple’ in English. Spanish people call it ‘la manzana’. Arabs call it ‘tuffaah’. Hindi people call it ‘seb’. Marathi people call it ‘safarchand’. Some people like the red colour of apple. Some love its sweet taste. Others like the slight sour taste that accompanies the sweetness. And some people give in to its aroma. All these people are talking about the same thing. They’re focusing on a different property of the same thing. It would be foolish and absurd to say that la manzana exists and tuffaah doesn’t exist. Or that safarchand is better because it tastes sweet while seb only has a sweet aroma and no taste. Some people cannot imagine having plain apple as it is, so they use it to make apple pie or pastry made of apple. It becomes easier for them to have apple in that form. Apple still is the essence of pie and pastry, and thus these people too want apple and like apple. It would be improper to say that if you’re not having a plain apple then you don’t like apple. Because the attributes of apple like colour, taste and aroma come into these forms as well, and it’s because of these very attributes they like these forms. While God is a spiritual entity and apple is material, this analogy was used just to highlight how many people find it more worthwhile to argue and debate over a particular name or property of the supreme force instead of understanding, delving and dwelling in the true nature of this force. Common sense and logic tells you that there is only one supreme force. There can never be more than one authority at the highest level. For example, how many CEO’s does a company have? How many principals does a school/college have? How many presidents does a country have? Just one. Why? To facilitate absolute decision and policy making. So, when absolute decision making is essential at the highest level of such smaller institutions, does the essentiality of it not get much more at the supreme level? Just imagine what level of chaos there would be if there had been more than one force at the supreme level, and they had a difference of opinion about governing! Obviously and thankfully, there is only one supreme force. But, as drawn out in the above analogy, the way to approach this supreme force differs from person to person, because each one finds one approach more appealing than the other. To elaborate this in another way, it can be said that God is the back end of the universe. While some people prefer directly reaching this back end, others prefer doing it through front ends in different forms. As long as their requests made at the front end have the right address by being accompanied by feelings of reverence, worship and positive thoughts, their requests are bound to reach the back end. Because this back end, God is the most intelligent force in this universe, well capable of detecting what is directed towards Him and what is not. He is not like a dumb web page, where if the wrong hyperlink is clicked, the wrong page would open. So, why should anybody object to the freedom of using or not using a front end? Let people have their choices and let us learn to respect them.
iv) Kernel: The Kernel is the heart and soul of Car. The Kernel consists of different modules. For a person driving Car, the Kernel is absolutely compulsory. Except module 1 of the Kernel which is optional, rest of the modules should be followed strictly. No modifications in the kernel are permitted. Having flexibility doesn’t mean that there should be a complete absence of rules or that the rules should be permitted to be bent as and when one wishes. Because doing that will lead to chaos and disorder. Flexibility only means that the rules are framed in such a way that they offer ample room to move about to a person while doing justice to everyone or at least not doing any injustice to anyone. And so, the Kernel comprises of some basic rules and principles (called as modules) which form a framework to live in. Everyone is permitted to live freely within this framework. Going outside of the framework implies that a person is being evil. It will mean that somebody else is being deprived of his/her rights and hence it is not permissible. Without the Kernel there can be no Car. And so without following the Kernel a person cannot be a Car driver.
v) Shell: Shell comprises of the principles and guidelines regarding how things are to be handled in day to day life, how should a person deal with some specific situations in life and the general customs and traditions. The crucial part about Shell is that it is secondary to the Kernel. At any point the principles in Shell SHOULD NOT be used over-riding the modules in Kernel. Earlier, I was talking about retaining the good things in the existing religions. The Shell fulfills that requirement. How does the Shell work? As is said above, every person is blessed with a sense of rationality and logic. This combined with the Kernel, a person is placed in an excellent position to understand what is good and what is not. Ideally, a Car driver should pick from every religion what is good and what makes complete sense. He should be open to good things in all religions. He should not keep any negative prejudice towards any of the existing religions because the good things in every religion are downloaded from God’s server in the spiritual world. Having said this, however, if a person feels that he is more suited to following the good things in only one religion, he may as well continue it and adopt it has his/her Shell. But it must very well be remembered that this is just the Shell and is secondary to the Kernel and in such a case if a person ever finds that the Shell says something that doesn’t conform with Kernel, then he/she should give up what the Shell says and do what fits in the Kernel. Car gives people complete flexibility about the Shell. They may use any Shell of their choice or if they don’t wish to, they may as well not use any Shell at all.
vi) Levels: Car understands that the capacities, circumstances and available resources for different people are different. Hence it’s unfair to drag all on one level and judge them. So car provides 2 levels for Car drivers to operate on. Level 1 is the lower level and has comparatively lesser restrictions and compulsions. Level 2 is the higher level and has comparatively more restrictions and compulsions. Level 2 is the ideal level that Car recommends for all. Each individual should try his best to be on Level 2. However, levels are not permanent. A person on Level 2 may slip down to Level 1 when he fails to keep one particular restriction for some time and likewise a person on Level 1 may climb up to Level 2 by practicing the required restrictions for some period of time. The restrictions on the 2 levels are made clear in the ‘Tools’.
vii) Tools: These are the tools to help people deal with those areas in life which at times may not effectively be dealt with using just the Kernel. Tools are absolutely essential and hence compulsory to those Car drivers who choose to use no Shell and Ideal Shell. However, a particular restriction applicable on a particular level is applicable to people using any Shell. For example, Islam Shell has no mention about smoking being prohibited but in Level 2 smoking is not permitted, hence a smoker will be on Level 1 whichever Shell he uses.
Kernel
As discussed earlier Kernel is the heart and soul of Car. Car doesn’t insist that people accept what it says blindly without questioning. Hence, the modules in the Kernel are logically and rationally proved and explained in The Source Code of the Kernel: http://car2008.awardspace.com/kernelsource.htm .It is recommended that all readers and all Car drivers read and understand it properly. Car drivers are expected to understand, believe and stand by the modules given below. All the modules in the Kernel are compulsory for Car drivers except module 1. Module 1 is optional on Level 1.
Module 1: God exists. God has created the universe. God keeps a constant check on the entire universe. God wants you to be happy.
Module 2: ‘To be happy and make others happy’, is the ultimate goal of every human being. A balance within the two parts of that statement is absolutely essential. An ideal way to achieve this is – first we must try make ourselves happy without making others unhappy, because we cannot efficiently make others happy if we are not happy. And, in the process, based on our capacity we must try to make others happy. Any action or deed which makes you happy but does injustice on others, or deprives them of some of their moral right, keeps both you and the other person away from your ultimate goal and hence is forbidden.
Module 3: Money is not bad. Selfishness is bad. Selfishness is the root of all evil. Keep yourself away from selfishness.
Module 4: An attempt to achieve the ultimate goal also helps develop the mankind.
Module 5: There always will be people who are evil no matter how good you are to them. But most often the mistake that people do is that they mistakenly take good people to be evil because of difference of an opinion. The test of being evil is if a person puts his happiness ahead of the happiness of others i.e. displays selfishness and deprives other people of their rights then that act is evil. A person should be willing to make an extra effort in differentiating which action is truly evil and which is a misunderstanding. If someone is trying to do injustice to you then you must show enough resistance appropriately.
Car believes that an atheist or an agnostic, i.e. a person who doesn’t believe in the existence of God is not necessarily a bad or an evil person. And hence he is still very much capable of achieving his ultimate goal in this world. And so, Module 1 is optional on Level 1.
Shell
Kernel is the basic framework which defines Car. Shell adds the details to it. Hence it is very obvious that at any point it should never happen that Shell is followed compromising on the Kernel. A person may use any Shell he wishes – Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism etc. But the best Shell that Car insists on using is Ideal Shell. A person using Ideal Shell is expected to be open to all other Shells without any negative prejudices and selectively choose the principles and definitions which stand true on the test of logic and rationality and which make complete sense. A person who has understood the Kernel properly is in a good position to do this. It’s better if one uses a Shell. However, it’s not compulsory. A person may as well use just the Kernel and no Shell at all.
Some of the common Shells are:
Ideal Shell (ideash)
Hinduism Shell (hish)
Islam Shell (islash)
Christianity Shell (chrish)
Buddhism Shell (budsh)
Evident implications
From the explanation of the elements of Car, Kernel and Shell a few things become evident. They are not explicitly mentioned in the Kernel but are implied. Hence these evident implications be considered as a part of Kernel.
Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism etc. are not different religions but different Shells. All are bound by one common Kernel. No one has a right to question or denounce other person’s Shell or declare his own Shell to be superior, because each person has full freedom to choose his Shell. Since all are bound by one Kernel, the people following different Shells do not belong to different religions. Thus obviously, they are permitted to interact with each other in all possible ways including being invited for certain special rituals, being into romantic relationships and getting married, since all are Car drivers. In marriage there is no necessity for a person to give up his/her Shell and adopt the Shell of the other. ‘Car drivers’ expression also highlights one fact, that we drive Car, Car doesn’t drive us – religion is meant for human beings, human beings are not meant for the religion. Religion can never be bigger than humanity.
Tools
Tools provide for clarity in those areas in life which could be confusing purely with the help of the Kernel. Tools are an auxiliary to Kernel hence they are compulsory for people using no Shell and ideash. But just the same they will also guide others. While using Tools one must remember that the modules of Kernel also come into play at every point.
Sex
Love, not marriage is the criterion in Car for sex. Level 2 recognizes sex when it is with a person whom you love and are committed to. Because marriage is but a social declaration of feelings and commitment towards each other. And Car believes that social declaration should not be the criterion for people to be able to express their feelings towards each other and to get closer nor should people be compelled into making social declaration purely for being able to do this. Level 2 doesn’t approve of one night stands, be it with people you know or with strangers, considering factors like getting attached to the person not intended, emotional disturbances later on, risk of getting or making pregnant in spite of precautions, and STD (Sexually Transmitted Diseases). Level 1 however, understands that the emotional make and sensitivity of all persons is not the same and hence, if both the persons can be absolutely sure of not getting any emotional disturbances and take care of other risk factors then one night stands are permitted. These rules apply to gay and lesbian relationships as well, considering that the emotional nature of these relationships is same as a heterosexual relationship. It must however be remembered very well, that cheating defeats Module 2 of Kernel. Romantic relationships are inclined to possessiveness. If you are already committed to somebody then you may indulge in a one night stand or any other form of sex with any other person only and only if your first partner expressly approves of it.
Marriage and live-in relationships: Whenever 2 persons are committed to each other and want to stay with each other, Level 2 recognizes and prescribes only marriage as the way to go, considering that in countries where live-in relationships are not legal the couple and their children should get all the rights and benefits of a relationship of commitment. Secondly, when social declaration is made, morally, socially and legally it becomes that much difficult for the couple to separate. So, whenever they have issues between them they take longer time to actually come to a decision to separate, and it is very likely that by the time the time passes, they actually start feeling differently. It’s just common sense to see that, whenever a person has a lot of hassles to go through for something, he is more likely to compromise and give it another chance. Car doesn’t say that in spite of being incompatible and unhappy in company of each other couples should continue staying with each other. The option of divorce is always there in extreme cases. However, it shouldn’t be very easy for people to separate, because decisions taken in haste at the spur of the moment can make one repent. So, getting married is in best interest of the couple and any children they may have.
Level 1 however understands that it may not be possible socially, financially or otherwise for all people wanting to stay together to get married and it would be unfair towards them to not let them stay together. So, live-in relationships are permitted on Level 1. However, it’s recommended to such couples to not have their own children as long as they don’t get married.
Incest: Incest means sexual bonding or romantic relationship with a person within close family. This includes mother, father, brother sister, grandfather, grandmother, paternal uncle, paternal aunt, maternal uncle, maternal aunt and first cousins. Incest is forbidden considering that it’s biologically and socially hazardous.
Biologically it’s hazardous because if two closely related persons have a child, the child is very likely to be born with physical or mental defects like having a deformed face or being mentally retarded. Closer is the relationship, more are the chances.
Socially, it’s hazardous from two points of view – i)hazardous to a person himself and ii)hazardous to the society if not disapproved. It’s hazardous to a person because in a civilized society the relationship in a male and female is defined in different ways. Each of these is essential for a person to have a healthy social life. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/341148/understanding_the_male_female_relationship.html?cat=41
These relationships work best when the sanctity of each is maintained. Secondly, every level of relationship has a level of restrictions defined. When any restriction is lifted, it automatically and impliedly gets lifted for the entire level. Both these factors are more prominently felt within the family because family has the prime level of relationship and all people know each other very well. When incest takes place, the sanctity of the relationship is not maintained and the restrictions of the level are lifted. I would like to illustrate these two things through 2 examples.
Example 1: If you’ve used the social networking site Orkut you’ll know that you can set certain level of restrictions on your photo album or scrapbook. Either only friends can view them or friends of friend can view them or all people can view them. Once you lift the restriction for one person on a particular level, it is automatically lifted for all people in that level. If your present level of restriction is “friends” but you like one person from “friends of friends” and you change the setting to “friends of friends” automatically all friends of friends are able to view it. While this may seem like an inapplicable example considering that a person may not have the same feeling towards everyone in that level, but an implied lift-off of the restriction takes place in the minds of other people on that level. This will be better illustrated in the next example.
Example 2: Suppose you have 3 sisters. You feel sexually towards one of them. You get married to her. After this, can you tell me whether your relationship with the other 2 sisters ever be the same again, even though you don’t have slightest bit of sexual feeling towards them? They will never be able to look at you the same way.
It is hazardous to the society if it’s not disapproved right away. It sets itself as an example and gives inspiration to more people to follow it. We’ve discussed its hazards above and we don’t need more and more people to follow it. For example, in a classroom suppose the mobile phone of a student rings, he answers it, talks for a couple of minutes and then hangs up and if the teacher doesn’t object or doesn’t speak a word about it, the rest of the students automatically derive a meaning that it’s perfectly acceptable. In coming days we’ll definitely see more students’ mobile phones ringing and they talking on it in the class. So an act of incest should be disapproved by the society. By disapproving, I do not mean that such people should be hated, should be treated like what Jews were treated in Germany or even treated plain badly. But adults within the families in contact of or living in neighbourhood of such people should talk to the children within the family of understanding age about this and make them realize that this is something improper and should not be emulated.
And so, incest is forbidden on Level 2. A person shouldn’t indulge into sexual activity or romantic relationship within any of the relationships mentioned above.
Level 1 however recognizes that in some communities, it is an accepted practice to have marriages with certain first cousins, e.g. with the daughter of mom’s brother or with the son of dad’s sister. So, it’s permitted to get married only to the first cousin of the type with which it’s a common tradition within that community.
Drinking
Considering its addictive nature, the control that it makes one lose over oneself, its capability to change a person’s allegiance and the enormous money that it makes one waste, drinking is not permitted on Level 2.
Level 1 though, believes that if consumed in small quantities very occasionally, alcohol is not addictive and isn’t capable of changing a person’s allegiance. In some cultures such occasional drinking is symbol of socializing. Hence, occasional drinking of small quantities is permitted on Level 1. Excessive drinking or drinking to the point of getting drunk is absolutely forbidden on both levels.
Smoking
Any kind of addiction is bad. Smoking is worse than drinking considering its long lasting ill effects on the body. Hence it is not allowed on Level 2.
On Level 1 however it’s taken into consideration that smoking isn’t capable of changing a person’s allegiance. It also doesn’t make one lose control over himself. Smokers are not necessarily evil people. They are capable of achieving their ultimate goal. Hence smoking is permitted.
Drugs
The addiction of narcotic and psychedelic drugs is instant, unlike drinking. Also, in drinking the addiction is more of a mental need than physical. Drug addiction becomes a heavy physical need along with mental and it has serious long lasting effects on the body. Hence drugs are absolutely forbidden on both the levels. Drugs are not permitted to be tried even once.
Gambling
The principle of any form of gambling is that the one at the playing end loses much more often than he wins, so that the one who owns the business makes money. Without this principle the owner cannot make money and there cannot exist gambling without this principle no matter how attractive it is made to look. Gambling is addictive as well, and it makes a person lose big amounts of money over and over again. Hence gambling is forbidden on both the levels. However, this doesn’t include the gambles one is often required to indulge into as part of some business. For example, a person buying the distribution rights for a particular area with the hope that it makes huge money. Because taking calculated risk is absolutely must in every business.