Wings II

On the Wings of a Bird, Part II

By John Taylor; 2007 August 05

There is a saying that "if a man neglects education, he walks lame to the end of his life." Similarly, Einstein is often quoted as saying that "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." And of course the Baha'i writings compare two of its most important social principles, the equality of the two sexes and the harmony of science and religion, to the two wings of a bird.

The problem of balancing two legs while walking is as ancient as the human body. Our human technique of bipedal locomotion is quite rare among animals, most of which are quadrupeds. As a result, our way of getting around with two legs more closely resembles birds and bats in flight than the crawling beasts. Quadrupeds have the advantage of built-in redundancy; they are quite capable of limping around after the loss of one, or even two legs. Not so with birds, or humans. Our binary movement, on the other hand, reflects a symmetry that runs deep in nature. Using only two forces us to understand intimately that polar resonance that runs through everything from atoms to galaxies. Binary symmetry is inherent to knowledge itself, as Baha'u'llah implies:

"Knowledge is as wings to man's life, and a ladder for his ascent. Its acquisition is incumbent upon everyone." (Tablets, pp. 51-52)

Religious thought continually depicts the soul as a bird balancing two wings as it flies. This is probably because wings in flight, more even than the legs of a worldly walker, must stay in delicate balance to keep the bird from falling from the sky. Thus the non-concrete entity we call the soul can only progress if it balances life in this world with that of the spirit. This is emphasized in, for example, the writings of Buddhism,

"He contents himself with the robe that protects his body, and with the alms with which he keeps himself alive. Wherever he goes, he is provided with these two things; just as a winged bird, in flying, carries his wings along with him. By fulfilling this noble Domain of Morality he feels in his heart an irreproachable happiness." (The Eightfold Path, Buddha, the Word, Morality, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Step)

Hindu scriptures also make frequent reference to birds and their wings. An Upanishad even compares the male and female element of humanity to the wings of a bird, though not perhaps with the egalitarian emphasis found in the Baha'i scriptures,

"Next follows the right wing. It is this world (the earth), it is this Agni, it is speech ... These are the six powers (of the right wing)... Next follows the left wing. It is that world (heaven), it is that sun, it is mind ... These two (the right and the left wings) are deficient and excessive. The Brihat (the left wing) is man, the Rathantara (the right wing) is woman. The excess belongs to the man, the deficiency to the woman. Therefore they are deficient and excessive. Now the left wing of a bird is verily by one feather better, therefore the left wing is larger by one verse." (Upanishads vol. 1, Aitareya-Aranyaka, Part 1, Second Khanda, 1-5)

It is interesting that this ancient scripture should say that men lean to extremism and women are by nature conservatives, as I just read that there is a similar belief among aboriginal peoples around the world. In the rain forest, for instance, male hunters will continue killing indefinitely. The village women believe that it is their role to intervene when the storage bins are full and tell the men that enough is enough. When these women visit the polluted, immoderate civilization of the West their first reaction is always to ask: "Why do not your women intervene and tell the men to cool it?" The answer, of course, is that here our wings are badly out of joint. Yes, there is inequality between men and women, but that is an outer sign of a deeper imbalance, a more profound corruption. This Plato in what I consider to be his masterpiece, the Laws, describes with perfect clarity. Let us close with that.

Athenian Stranger: In what preceded, as you will remember, our Cnosian friend was speaking of a man or a city being inferior to themselves: Were you not, Cleinias?
Cleinias: I was.
Ath. Now, which is in the truest sense inferior, the man who is overcome by pleasure or by pain?
Cle. I should say the man who is overcome by pleasure; for all men deem him to be inferior in a more disgraceful sense, than the other who is overcome by pain.
Ath. But surely the lawgivers of Crete and Lacedaemon have not legislated for a courage which is lame of one leg, able only to meet attacks which come from the left, but impotent against the insidious flatteries which come from the right?
Cle. Able to meet both, I should say.
Ath. Then let me once more ask, what institutions have you in either of your states which give a taste of pleasures, and do not avoid them any more than they avoid pains; but which set a person in the midst of them, and compel or induce him by the prospect of reward to get the better of them? Where is an ordinance about pleasure similar to that about pain to be found in your laws? Tell me what there is of this nature among you: What is there which makes your citizen equally brave against pleasure and pain, conquering what they ought to conquer, and superior to the enemies who are most dangerous and nearest home?
Meg. I was able to tell you, Stranger, many laws which were directed against pain; but I do not know that I can point out any great or obvious examples of similar institutions which are concerned with pleasure... (Plato, The Laws, Book I)