Hilton Anderson believes that humanity is driving itself into the ground and bringing the rest of the world down with it. Ongoing wars, fights based on religious beliefs, and the constant development of increasingly destructive weapons are indications to the 83-year-old psychologist that we are living in an unsustainable world of fear and polarized beliefs. Cheerful, right?
Fortunately for humanity, Anderson not only traces the origins of the problem but also outlines a solution in his book “Peace Is Oneness,” self-published this year through iUniverse Inc. As the West Windsor resident explains, science has long been grounded in the belief that the material is everything, while religion emphasizes the spiritual, and to achieve a state of peace people must recognize the value in both of these views and reach a middle ground between them.
Anderson’s book has several lessons that seem particularly relevant in the winter holiday season. He identifies three stages through which humanity must progress to move away from demand for the material and towards universal love. The first is getting and having — the competition that currently exists for goods. From there people move to sharing, which is acceptable as long as all are provided for, and finally giving, which is sharing not for the sake of material possessions but as an act of unconditional love.
The ultimate goal, he writes, is universal love: the realization that God, the source of love, and all humans are one. “What would happen if humanity realized that what is done to one is suffered by all, if not immediately, then eventually?” he asks. “This would result in the full realization by everyone that ‘all humanity is one.’
“The implications are profound. It would be the end of war, and universal equality of spirit would at last begin to be expressed. Every effort would be judged by its impact on all of humanity rather than the benefit of a few. True gain only comes from universal benefit. Gain at the expense or exploitation of others rebounds against the greater good of the whole.”
To get to this point of “oneness,” though, scientists and religious leaders must make concessions, and a fundamental shift must occur in the way people consider the material and their relation to other humans.
From the religious side, Anderson writes, “the religious fundamentalists need to shift away from affirming the beliefs of their religion which separate them from others and stop declaring their beliefs correct and those of other religions wrong.”
Scientists also have changes to make. They “need to realize that in the scientific pursuit of ‘truth,’ there needs to be a human-oriented view of doing no harm. Science must be in the service of humanity not just in the service of science,” Anderson explains. “As grand and noble as the pursuit of truth is in scientific exploration, it must be recognized as partial truth. Scientific truth requires the truth of revelation just as religious truth requires the understanding of the truth of science.”
At the age of 83 Hilton Anderson has had many opportunities to consider the relation between religion and science. One of the most significant came in 1973, when he, his sister, and his father stood by as his mother, age 70, was dying.
“I was present at her death and I realized I knew nothing about what was happening. The whole medical profession was oriented around trying to save lives, not helping the family of someone who was dying. But then a nurse came in and she was the first person to acknowledge that my mother was dying.
“This transition at the end of her life amazed me. This transcendent change came over her for the last hour of her life. There was absolute serenity and peace. The struggle for life had ended. The acceptance of death had replaced it.” Part of the transition includes the family. Says Anderson: “The relatives have to reach the point of letting the person go, in order for them to die.”
“I began studying everything. I realized that too much was being swept under the rug.” Anderson’s inquiry led to the study of eastern religions and eventually to publication of his first book, “Search for the Source,” published in 2005.
Anderson was raised in a household where his parents were agnostics — a father who worked as a draftsman at Bell Labs in Murray Hill and a mother who was a traditional homemaker — who sent him off to Sunday school at an Episcopal church because they felt children should have at least some exposure to religion.
In the waning days of World War II Anderson served in the Army for 14 months in the medical corps and then enrolled at Rutgers, earning a degree in psychology in 1951. After several unfulfilling jobs in the private sector, Anderson went into teaching, earned a doctorate, and eventually became a school psychologist. He served in that role for 25 years, the last 19 years in the Princeton district. In the 1970s he also served a term on the WW-P Board of Education, which at the time was overseeing the construction of what was then the brand new high school.
While at Rutgers he met his future wife, a Douglass College student, at a dance. “When I met her the first time I knew intuitively that we would get married.” Lorraine taught high school home economics and ran the Center for Urban Living Skills at Mercer County Community College’s James Kerney Campus in Trenton.
The Andersons, now living in Village Grande, have three children. David is the executive director of the Trenton Boys and Girls Club. Jean Brantley, who earned a law degree from Georgetown, is with the Federal Reserve in Washington, D.C. Lynn Barclay is a homemaker and wife of David Barclay, who runs Chamberlin and Barclay landscaping company.
Anderson’s spiritual quest has led to some observations about the scientific and medical communities. “Present-day science is materially motivated. And doctors are interested in the physical body. Most of us only see ourselves in a physical light. The hospital is essentially a human body shop.”
“Worldwide we need to wake up to these other elements.”
Anderson insists that we must move beyond the physical to attain the ideal of oneness. “Spiritually there is no inequality, but only oneness,” he writes. “The spiritual consequences of our behaviors are largely ignored. But the spiritual underlies the physical, and until it is given serious attention, we will continue to do violence and harm to our physical being.”
He sees hope in science and religion for further recognition of the spiritual and movement toward oneness. From science he looks to “new understanding of brain functioning and intervention that will increase the development of higher levels of conscious awareness among large numbers of people.” From religion, he writes, “we may hope for a new orientation away from rewards in an afterlife and toward living life now, as a realization of spirit manifested. The outlook is to learn to express Love in this life, rather than insisting that love can only be completely expressed in an afterlife.”
In today’s globalized world, where people of all cultures have the potential to be connected to one another, Anderson sees a growing opportunity for humanity to break out of its downward trajectory. “Humanity for the first time in its long history has the potential to enter a new era of understanding,” he writes. “This new awareness is not a renunciation of the past, but rather a new integration of the past with the present. It is an integration of the world within, represented by religion, and the world without, represented by science. This is a marriage of our rational understanding of the world around us and the rational understanding of the internal world of consciousness.”
Ultimately, though, change begins at the individual level: “Each individual can decide whether or not to be an instrument of love. Love is the only thing you can give away that costs you nothing. In fact, you cannot truly give love away because it is returned with loving — perhaps not in the way you expect, but if you are not too judgmental, you will recognize the love your love generated.”
— Sara Hastings
