Religion, it seems to me, came into existence as a result of man’s search for an inner meaning and purpose of life. The beginning was, presumably, man’s inability to understand many natural processes and hence ascribing them to a higher power – to be feared and to be venerated. Over centuries (or millenniums), this fear of an unknown God transformed into diverse forms, from love for a personal God to forthright denial of any divine influence. Many of these lines of reasoning that gained considerable acceptance and following came to be identified as religions; proponents of these ideologies became their prophets. The primary purpose of religion, thus, is to throw light on the nature of Truth and show the way that leads there.
Since the path to enlightenment is fraught with dangers and distractions, many religions also laid down a code for their followers which, incidentally, had a civilizing effect on man as he emerged the most powerful species on earth. In spite of all his progress and unassailable might, he still remained accountable to a superior force, or to a set of principles. These principle reflect the common sense and wisdom acquired and refined over generations, and often serve as a handbook for right living. In setting common standards on what is acceptable and what is not, religion is like the conscience of a people. The comparison to conscience should drive home the point that religious code, unlike laws of the land, are not enforceable, and is only a guide to those who wish to abide by it for their own benefit. However, if a majority subscribe to certain religious views, the law of the land might naturally be influenced by the tenets of this religion. This has possibly been the most basic role of religion as affecting common man, though not its deepest purpose.
We have different religions, because the path to God is not unique. To each one, his own path appears best, because that is most suitable for him. Having grown up in the Hindu culture, I have no difficulty in accepting the Father-God of Christianity, the monotheism of Islam, the Sun-God of the Incas, or other manifestations of the unmanifest God that are celebrated by different religions across the world. I see no irony that the infinite God is present in the most tiny particle of matter (even as he pervades the vast emptiness of this universe) and hence can be worshiped in the form of an idol. I don’t find a contradiction that the impersonal God can take the personal form of Jesus Christ or Sri Krishna. In a single text of Hinduism, you will find a number of different paths being advocated at different places and unless you are able to appreciate their underlying oneness, you will be thoroughly confused. The Path of Devotion (Bhakthi) may appear more different from the Path of Wisdom (Jnana) than Islam is from Christianity. The stupidity of people who have all looked into the same kaleidoscope and are fighting with each other regarding the ‘actual’ design it ‘holds’ is unfathomable! If they cannot understand that the same light, reflecting in different ways, gives rise to the multifarious images seen in a kaleidoscope, why don’t they at least stop fighting and just enjoy the beauty of the design that each is able to see?
15 - 15Shares
Rama i think, in todays times religion is highly overrated. a religion comprises of a system which is refined by many generations and therefore may contain lot of positive and helthy practices, however a substantial part is based upon either superstition or different compulsions pertinent to the period of formation of the system. as a guiding element still the sytem worked and continue to work for the majority of believers as the basic and ultimate aim is a noble one and u may get that point sometimes ( and ofcourse better to be afraid and righteous than a pain in others ass).
but i beleve the solution answers only yersterdays problems or atleast nomore relevant for the coming times.
two reasons are
1.religion is increasingly associated with power projection and a tool blind a commoner. its like nuclear energy or genetic experiments, which cannot be harnessed all cool and happy without some firebacks and i think the era of peaceful, progressive employment of religion is over(atleast with the existing ones). so the such disadvantages weigh more than the benign ones as a pessimistic/realistic me see that.
2. all the roads leads to same place and no one is superior to the other. relgions offer a very secluded path and then too the loopholes and voids makes them very difficult to follow with some conviction. its still a man made system and subjective to some peoples explanations, only a blind man can believe them all as true. moreover issues like homosexuality, euthenasia cannot be handled justifiably within the limitations of almost all major religions..
its still unclear what all make one a religios person or not. may be im the one more confused. i duly acknowlege the importance of strong faith in something(sometimes his religion) that drives lot of people and inspire them to do good. but then isnt it about a way of channeling,or some kind of indoctrination. my aim is not to completely differ from what u said but i think you are paying too much of a compliment. and thank you for making me think 🙂
Your thoughts are sincere and interesting, and merit a detailed consideration. In coming days, on Avalokanam, we'll explore this subject in greater depth, and that will hopefully throw more light on practical utility (or lack thereof) of religion in this and the next age. The key, I believe, lies in being able to use the wisdom from the past without being bound or limited any baggage that comes along with it. Let's think of how that would be possible – if at all 🙂