This is on a touchy subject – “religion”, so it may offend the sensitive types and those that do not want to question the basis of their beliefs. It is not meant to offend, but merely to think about what is often accepted simply because it is ‘inherited’ – like genes! So it is NOT for those that are on the ‘faith’ trip or those that are unwilling to analyse their beliefs – if you are, stop right here and do something else. Please!
That recent post on the sound pollution proliferated by some venues of religious worship did not elicit very much response and it got us to wondering why. A good possibility is that this subject is virtually taboo with regard to expressing an honest opinion – and for good reason I guess. Most folk are very ‘defensive’ or is ‘touchy’ a better word to describe the reluctance to look at their respective beliefs ‘objectively’. There are many ‘intellectuals’ and even ‘men of science’ I know who have unquestionable faith in the beliefs passed down to them by their parents, who follow the rituals, accept the doctrines and will defend their positions even though the science that they accept will not have ‘proof’ to verify their tenets.
‘Religion’, as we are all well aware, has been the root cause of wars and myriad other forms of distress to mankind throughout the centuries. The pressure on the evangelists to convert unbelievers to accept their beliefs is another facet of the negative aspect of ‘religion’ in general. The religious leaders of their respective faiths have immense power over the followers of their beliefs. Here in Sri Lanka, one sees how politicians in particular, in spite of all the corruption and ‘sins’ that they are up to their eyeballs in, troop to meet religious figures at the drop of a hat. And one could not be blamed to presume that these religious leaders are quite happy to have this practice continue, instead of responding in a manner more in keeping with the doctrines the Buddhist philosophy or religion espouses.
So why is it that we are ‘afraid’ to question the beliefs passed down to us? Is it fear of the unknown – that ‘place’ that awaits us after this life is done? And why do folk get to the point that they would kill another who they feel belittles their system of belief? Salman Rushdie was under threat of death passed by some ‘holy’ leader of the Islamic faith for being ‘insulting’ to the religion in one of his books. We saw more recently the furor that was caused by a newspaper in Europe publishing cartoons deemed ‘insulting’ to Islam. And then the Pope, no less, put his foot in it when he made a statement considered derogatory – again to Islam – and ended up apologizing.
The ‘communal’ clashes in many countries are largely based on religious differences and result in large scale mayhem and murder and the most grotesque violence perpetrated on anyone in the way of the mobs. The internal ‘politics’ among the various religious hierarchy is also an indicator of the lust for power within the systems. The wealth and status that religion generates is another factor that motivates would be leaders of these systems. The question is, can anyone who has the capacity to differentiate between what is ‘good’ or ‘moral’ and what is ‘not good’ or ‘immoral’ conclude that what has been described above is beneficial to the human species or not?
This then is the dilemma. ‘Religion’, which one assumes is based on a right way of life and doing no harm to others (including animals and other ‘non-threatening’ life forms), has been transformed into something that is responsible for the most horrendous suffering throughout history, throughout the world, at one time or another. And surely part of the reason for this is the desire to dominate – evolving into the process of the politicization of ‘religion’ and from there it is generally a downward spiral (morally speaking). Or is it?
It seems to us that ‘religion’ is, more often than not, used as a crutch – something you turn to when in need of help. We see ‘poojas’ being conducted in the quest for all manner of favours, be it for passing exams, vows to perform deeds or offer all kinds of ‘rewards’ for the granting of whatever it is that is being asked for. Surely this is not what ‘religion’ is all about? Isn’t it more about following the Ten Commandments (for Christians), The Eightfold Path (for Buddhists), the precepts in the Upanishads (for Hindus)? We haven’t got into the Koran, so we don’t know what Islam recommends, but it is doubtful that it asks for the life of anyone that views it in a different perspective.
Perhaps the ideal situation would be for folk to apply the core ingredients of their respective faiths in the living of their lives, for it does seem that all religions have as their essence, the directions to live a moral life, don’t they? What does it matter what another group chooses to believe or who or what to worship, and why use that to create conflict and the resulting tragedies? Or is ‘religion’ used as an excuse to perpetrate these unspeakable horrors?
The questions are innumerable and the answers would depend on where an individual’s head is at. So take a look at yourself and your stance and try to be objective about why you are what you are in terms of the ‘religion’ you profess to follow. Maybe it will be to your benefit in the long-term – as far as living your life is concerned.
Phheeew! We did need to get that one off our chests – and we do hope no offence was taken, as none was ever intended. In parting, let me end with John Lennon’s thoughts on this and similar conditioned baggage many of us have inherited.
Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today…
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace…
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world…
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one
11 comments
Comments feed for this article
February 4, 2007 at 7:37 am
kadalay
The human species differs from the animal kingdom by way of reason, thought and decision making that is in-built within our hearts and minds. Although animals do make decisions based on instinct rather than an analytical though process they do not possess the ability to make definite choices based on emotions. They simply do what they are supposed to do in every situation they are confronted with.
On the other hand, human beings enjoy the rich advantage of making choices which, sometimes, creates havoc and mayhem amongst them. These choices are the basic guiding factors on how they behave and act and develop their character and personalities.
Humans are all born free without any knowledge or data inside their heads. The initial nurturing and care provided by parents, siblings, neighbors, family and friends, is the basic education factor that initiates the growth of knowledge and information inside a growing child’s mind.
It is through this means that a child is fed with religion, culture, manners, rights and wrongs and also given a display of how to live one’s life from the example of the immediate family members with whom the child resides with.
A child grows up to adhere to a religion or philosophy based on the religion of the parents or guardians under whom the child is raised. Very few children, and even adults, care to question this faith as much as they would question a salesman before purchasing a house or car or even investing their monies into a financial scheme or insurance program. This is, basically, the nature of humanity.
The monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, teach about right and wrong, good and evil, God and Satan, and Heaven and Hell at the end of life. Buddhism teaches the theory of Karma where life is a cycle and Nirvana or a state of peace or contentment is the final exit from that cycle. Similarly other belief systems have their own beginnings and ends cluttered with a smattering of rituals and practices that have been practiced from their inception.
No religion or philosophy on the face of the earth can claim total immunity from man-made changes, additions, and interpolations, based on the needs of those who preached and managed it. This evolution, filled with so many changes, has developed into the many sects, groups, and sub-idealogies within these belief systems that we se in plenty across the globe today. No single religion is free from its divisions and sects and sub-sects.
Every sect or sub-sect, within a given belief system, have varied creeds, rituals, and beliefs embedded within them. Some are so varied that they even end up in hatred and hostilities between their adherents.
At the end of the day the system of belief that one adheres to, the way of life that one decides to live, and the basic character of the individual, becomes an outcome of his personal choice, which is in turn, based on so many variable factors that he has undergone, since birth, throughout his life.
Religion, Philosophy and belief systems also dictate the manner in which men and women relate and interact between each other. Some faiths are strict on monogamy while others allow polygamy. Some are lax about promiscuity while others enforce a total segregation of sexes. Then, there are the do’s and dont’s of drugs, intoxication, gambling, sexual activity, ethics, manners and interpersonal relationships.
While the strict adherents to these faith systems do make every attempt to follow the rules diligently, many others, while being a part of the faith still make choices to circumvent many of these regulatory requirements and thereby enjoy what has been prohibited, some openly while some choose to do it in secret. Here again it’s the choice factor that comes into play. At the end of the day it’s the individual personal choice that matters to the person irrespective of what he or she believes in or practices.
Looking at most of the belief systems that are practiced on the globe today one has to admit that none f them have any firm scientific backing and proof of their integrity, truth and validity. All are built on faith based on total blind belief and written scriptures that have been handed down from generation to generation whose integrity is open to question.
The concept of Heaven and Hell has no scientific backing. Neither has Nirvana. No one has entered these realms and returned to earth to tell us about their existence. Science cannot accept their existence purely on blind faith and age old scriptures.
The Buddha never preached to erect statues, build Temples and Dagobas at colossal costs while humans sufer in hunger, light oil lamps, offer flowers, conduct Perahera’s, etc etc. Similarly Jesus never asked for statues and crosses to be erected, Xmas to be celebrated, fasting at Easter etc etc. The same goes for many other religious practices, rituals and beliefs.
Of course, there are many who will claim that they do not need science to prove their belief systems in order to believe and adhere to them. That’s, again, their own personal choice and hey have every right to think and act that way. And then there will be those who are die hard science freaks who will choose to reject anything and everything that has no scientific evidence or proof. One of the problems that we face here is that we have to accept that science is not one hundred percent foolproof or complete. It is still evolving and we learn something new every day and we also may reject something today that was believed to be true yesterday. This is a fact of life. However, we have to admit the fact that whatever we know about science today has its own integrity confirmed by the accepted and published proofs and evidences.
In conclusion, it must be still understood and accepted that it is the eventual choices that we make for ourselves that finally matter to us at the end of the day. These choices are our own even though they may be guided, influenced and pressurized by external elements and forces that exist within our own societies, communities, families and environments.
February 4, 2007 at 10:23 am
javajones
The point we were trying to make is that perhaps there are very few folk out there who actually ‘look inward’ to see if what they have been conditioned to accept does make sense – particularly considering all the superficial actions (none of which are prescribed in the texts) that are perpetrated in the name of ‘religion’. Actually the first two lines of the post is the intention of it – in a nutshell. Lennon’s lines at the end are also relevant.
February 5, 2007 at 12:09 am
sittingnut
we need religions to give us universal moral values. since these cannot be objectively established through reason or science, religions resort to supernatural to establish them. so we say do not ever steal or kill, because god says so ( or will result in bad karma , or whatever). bc we know in purely earthly terms stealing can be excused away depending on the situation. since various ppl have various incompatible supernatural beliefs underlying their values( even when the values themselves are identical) it is inevitable they will clash.
this results in all sorts of paradoxes
you rightly point out the harms that have resulted from religions, wars among them . but the problem is we make that judgment ( that war is bad for instance) based on some sort moral value and ultimately such value can only be established through some sort of supernatural belief ( in other words a religion).
when there is no religion everything is relative and nothing is ‘good’ or ‘bad’. whether most ppl can live in such moral ambiguity and not judge is highly questionable. historically they have preferred to judge and tried to establish their way of judging as the only way by killing others.
can we judge that?
February 5, 2007 at 12:47 am
javajones
Interesting point of view - a couple of thoughts, though, as I’m not entirely sure of the following:
That “we need religions to give us universal moral values”
That “ these (moral values) cannot be objectively established through reason or science”
That “…ultimately such value can only be established through some sort of supernatural belief ( in other words a religion)”
That “..when there is no religion everything is relative and nothing is ‘good’ or ‘bad’”
And then you go on to say that “…whether most ppl can live in such moral ambiguity and not judge is highly questionable”, which would imply that it may be possible to do so.
And then you end with “…. historically they have preferred to judge and tried to establish their way of judging as the only way by killing others”, which is exactly the point we were attempting to make.
February 7, 2007 at 2:20 am
sittingnut
missed your comment earlier.
my point was that we cannot judge the morality of religious wars since all values used for such judging are based on some religion or other.
if believers of a religion think it is ok to make war it is ok for them. we can say it is bad but then by the very fact of saying that we indicate we believe in a different set of values ( another religion imo ). who is to say our values are ‘better’ than theirs ? who decides which values are universally true ? we ? but why not them? or is it god? but which god? the victorious god?
that is why i said it all ends in paradoxes
February 7, 2007 at 12:45 pm
javajones
Couldn’t repond earlier as we have been travelling and only just got the chance. In your response above you say:
“…all values used for such judging are based on some religion or other”,
and in your response to the following post ‘Religion - the more positive aspects” (you say:
“..each individual can certainly establish his or her own values without a religion, but by definition they differ from individual to individual”
Are you not contradicting yourself here?
As for “universal truth” - the only one we can go for is that ‘nothing is permamnent” OR “all things are subject to change” - no values and no judgements are involved.
Finally, everything we assimilate in our minds is ‘information’ - even ‘religion’, even ‘God’. One needs to process this information in relation to ‘experience’(which is also ‘information’
to arrive at individual values. Attempting to impose these values on others is the crux of the problem. ‘Religion’, ‘God’ and every other mental construct is ultimately a product of ‘mind’ - for Java and yours truly anyway. Anyone is free to disagree - no problem there, but we certainly don’t need to fight or wage wars because we disagree.
By the way, since you really feel like getting into this, why not do your own post on it and invite responses? My attempt failed dismally - except for a couple of others and you - and thanks for that (which kind of reinforces my view that very few are willing to look at where they are at, why it is they are and if it makes any sense). So shall we stop this exchange here? It seems like its going nowhere. But do your thing and we will be sure to respond if the need arises.
February 12, 2007 at 8:06 am
kadalay
I am with JJ for creating a separate blog to discuss this issue, openly and positively, which I think is very useful and valuable for all sane thinking human beings.
The bottom line here seems to be the way in which we are raised to think and believe in rather than the way we should be thinking and believeing in.
In a way, a kind of de-brainwashing exercise that we all need to do with ourselves in the process of developing and moving ahead with time into the future.
February 12, 2007 at 4:10 pm
javajones
‘Conditioning’ is inevitable - another fact of life as we know it. The trick would be to try to get beyond the accepted beliefs (what you refer to as “de-brainwashing”
and see if they make sense or if it is a useless set of information for the one involved.
These thoughts are expressed in my response to Sitting Nut (the paragraph about ‘information’ - above)
Get into it man - it’s a trip worth taking - and who knows, maybe we could throw away some of those crutches!
February 14, 2007 at 4:08 pm
sittingnut
again sorry about the delay in response
actually i already had one or two posts and some debates on my blog sometime ago. if you want to read them search for any relevant term (religion/values/buddhism/christian/god etc ) in my blog’s search box.
just to answer your question.
“Are you not contradicting yourself here?”
no. i made a distinction between those values claimed to be ‘universal’ and always need a religion to back them up, and those that are relative, and differ from person to person from the first. as i said ppl judge based on their values. so while you ( and i )may say war is bad based on our values, others may say the opposite. there is no way to objectives say who is correct unless everyone accepts a set of universal values, which is only possible if there is only one religion. hence the paradox of religious war
February 15, 2007 at 1:38 am
javajones
As I tried to explain to you, the only ‘Universal Truth’ (or ‘value’ as you put it) as I see it is that ‘all is subject to change’ or ‘impermanence’ - which, by its very nature is in constant flux.
And neither am I advocating ‘judging’ who is right or wrong. Folk are entitled to their views based on whatever it is that conditioned them. All I’m attempting here is to describe the nature of the problem - which ‘religion’, more often than not, is the root cause.
March 6, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Religion – the more positive aspects « Ephemeral Ruminations
[...] in Uncategorized We missed out on some of the positive effects or aspects of ‘religion’ in yesterday’s post , for as in everything, there is a Ying and a Yang. The incredibly wonderful art-forms - music, [...]