Even though the cultural dominance of Christianity is waning, its influence can still be seen in the post-Christian Western religious landscape. For example, many New Age spiritualites operate with the same assumption that we humans are insufficient (unaware, in the dark, unenlightened) when it comes to knowing the truth about reality. Instead of prophets, messiahs, and teachers many New Agers depend on celebrity authors and teachers, some who channel information from supposedly ancient, wiser beings.
The celebrities, teachers, and channelers function in the same way as prophets, Jesus, and his apostles and teachers. There is no way to verify what they say. We either believe them or we don't. If we believe them and do what they say, we will live in peace, love, and light. If we don't, we will live in pain, suffering and unawareness until we learn the lessons we need to learn in order to advance and ultimately escape the cycles of reincarnation. When we escape reincarnation we merge into ultimate being, like a drop of water merging into the ocean.
The two key features of this religious view have to do with us humans: insufficient in ourselves and necessarily dependent on others with special knowledge.
It is a faith-based view because it requires faith in unverifiable, revealed assertions.
As such it emphasizes our ear and sense of hearing over all of our other senses.
This post and the one just before it tackle a thorny subject--the nature of religion and its role in our lives. I'm certain that those who are believers in the various religious forms you mention take issue and umbrage with what you've said.
ReplyDeleteI found your inclusion of "New Age" thinking as a comparable form of religious thinking intriguing and thought-provoking. Certainly, many of the aphorisms that come across my Twitter or Facebook feeds are filled with homilies of the type you mention, reminding me that there are lessons to be learned and that every person crosses my path for a reason, etc. In my opinion, learning is rarely about a teaching designed to elicit certain behaviours. And some of those people cross my path only to irritate me. . .not teach a lesson.
All quasi-wit aside, the real meat and message of these two posts (for me) comes in your next to last sentence here. It is the "teaching" of nearly every religious form I've encountered--that somehow I am simply not enough, just as I am; that if only I follow certain rules, or perform certain rituals, or adhere to the plan laid out by a guru, I will be better, stronger, faster, smarter, and best of all, saved.
I've tried more than one of these over the course of my life, and don't feel any the faster, smarter, etc. If anything, my inability to live up to whatever is being proposed only serves to make me feel even worse about myself. It strikes me that all of this in a sense runs counter to that self-Esteem we have all also been coached to build in ourselves.
I've found that when I rely on my instincts, my intuition, my own intelligence and sense of appropriateness, my own code of ethics if you will, I do far better, and feel so much better about myself. You're right, our other senses are as valuable, if not more so, than our ability to hear.
Keep writing about this, Mark. If it encourages only a few to move away from faith in others toward faith in themselves, it's a beautiful thing.
Sara, thank you so much for your comment. I always appreciate it when you respond.
DeleteYes, you allude to another aspect of us being insufficient as we are: morality. It seems that many believe that without religion we have no morals. I disagree. As you say, when we trust and live according to our own instincts, intuition, and intelligence we do just fine. Some of the best human beings I've met have nothing to do with a religion.
I agree with your disagreement with the notion that without religion, we have no morals. On the contrary, I see religion, specifically those religions who baldly state that living with their version of moral rectitude, we go on to a far, far better place, demolishing the morality with which each of us is born.
ReplyDeleteWhat I see in that is something that provides justification for dismantling or destroying this place. Once we're all in the "next place", we don't need this any more, so why conserve it?
From my perspective this detaches us from our oneness with the animate earth, where what benefits our world cannot be anything but a benefit to us. I hope this makes some sense.