What if there was a massive time of enlightenment and people came to see religion doesn't lead to relationship with Spirit/spirit but instead to power for the religion? Some fear mankind couldn't think of moral standards if no religion dictated them. Some believe religion is the foundation of all government.
I understand how deeply ingrained the feeling is that religion is necessary to live together in harmony. For some, it's fear of hell and for others religious teachings that supposedly make for better lives. Let's just look at it though and forget what has been taught for a minute because it was all taught by those religions.
Think of the resources sucked into religious causes. Think of the wars fought for religious differences. What if that was turned to humanitarian needs instead and people found their personal spiritual path in the wilderness as most of the founders of most of the religions did.
Would there be less charitable giving without religions? I don't think so. Religions actually control how a lot of charity can be used. It takes people away from thinking who to help individually and puts it in the hands of the religion, who takes a cut of the pie-- sometimes the biggest piece. Without a religion or a tax deduction for giving, maybe more people would give to the family down the street who are in dire need but no organization can help them just a neighbor who saw their need and wanted to be a 'good Samaritan'.
Many people, who give a percentage of their income to a tax deductible cause, are giving it to their own church where it maintains an often elaborate building for them to worship, possibly a gymnasium to have fun, a place to park their teenagers and keep them out of trouble, a pastor to work out their spiritual programs, and a pastor's home which might not be fancy or then again might.
Yes, I know some churches are tiny and have low costs but many are huge and have gigantic costs. Either way, they are taking money for the religion. If someone wants a neighborhood club, fair enough. There are plenty of those already, but those members don't claim they're doing it for a higher purpose or for god. They do it for their own satisfaction and don't need a tax deduction for it-- or shouldn't.
If we had no religions, we would likely still have political, terrorist bombers but at least they wouldn't believe they were getting some heavenly reward. With no religious gurus, leaders, pastors, priests, people would have to work out their own code of beliefs based on what led to quality of life, not what some book that was written ages ago claimed was pleasing back then for god. Those books are all channeled wisdom, supposedly from god-- usually the one god even if they contradict each other. How do we know that? Because the religions tell us.
People say religions do a lot of good in the world. Does the good they might be doing equal the harm? Religions divide and conquer. Religions form elite clubs where people who belong can feel safe and sometimes superior, where someone else usually can join if they say the right words or undergo the proper initiation. Some religions kill those who leave those specialized clubs.
Some religions enter an area as missionaries (or conquer it with weapons) and set about telling the people they will go to hell (not to mention possibly be killed now) if they do not say certain words and change all of their customs to fit with those who live in some country far removed from their world.
Suppose the real meaning of enlightenment would be when humans turned away from religious superstition and stopped supporting religious leaders and buildings? What if people took responsibility for their own spiritual lives without a temple, mosque, cathedral, church, book or religious hierarchy telling them how? You know almost universally, the original teacher for most religions didn't believe in fancy buildings or even gathering together in a building at all.
Some might think I am not fair to religions (dare I use the word bitter) but just consider it. How much good do all those buildings around the world actually do? Yes, they can be beautiful. San Xavier del Bac in Tucson is beautiful. I take pleasure in its beauty, but isn't that as far as it should go?
Might religions be substituting their structure and ritual for something far deeper which is short-circuited by the need to protect religious power? I can see where religions might serve a purpose if they started people on a road but religions generally don't want to do that. They want to keep the people in the religion. I understand how some find religious belief gives comfort in difficult times; but at what price, if the comfort comes at the expense of truth?
This supposing is not about rejecting god or spiritual learning nor is it about doing all spiritual learning by oneself. It's not about refusing to join together in groups to share spiritual experiences each have had. It is instead about taking back responsibility for spiritual truth from any and all religions, making spiritual life experiential (which is where I think it has to be if it's to be real).
To me, the spirit world is rich, diverse, challenging and can take the seeker into realms that improves their physical life, adds to their joy and excitement at partaking in the mystery of the universe. Not to say a religion could not do that, but they generally don't. To do that why would they need a building? Why would they need a professional at their head? Why would they need a tax deduction?
I know this is all a fantasy and heresy to some. It's the kind of thinking that led to burning at the stake in the past. Many people would die before they would give up their religions. They do die for them and exactly what was the purpose of that... again?
4 comments:
I respect the direction of your thought and feel it is good to try to imagine a world without organized religion. In 2003 in Tibet the "observant" grandparents walked up the path with their toddler to temple and their little charges enjoyed turning the prayer wheels and crawling through the tunnels under the sacred books and adding butter to the candles, and looking at the dressed dolls and they turned their hand held prayer wheels. Then they ran down the hill back home for an afternoon nap. The point is religions when they are organized serve other purposes than being spiritual.
So I propose thinking about a future where religions are totally seperate from making life easier. There will be no birthday celebrations, no funerals, no weddings, no group prayers for healing. Instead people will have a do it your self manual in their computer. They won't need to talk to anyone else except their computer about their life changes.
would people do sex that way too? a way of making it safer *s*
Frankly I don't think religions particularly make life easier or harder although some might say they make it either way. I also don't think that the fact that religion can lead to ecstasy justifies it given the supposed purpose of any religion is to be pleasing to god. I am sure that those who witnessed witch burnings felt a religious ecstasy in what they were doing.
Religion is why some people are so upset that California might permit gay marriage. There is no logical reason to ban two adults, who love each other and want to make a public commitment into a lifelong (supposedly anyway) legal one, from doing so other than religious rules.
I cannot believe how much press the gay marriage thing is getting. The Sacramento Bee had the entire front page dedicated to stories about gay marriage. The State is $20billion in the hole, our roads are crumbling, the schools are a joke and hospitals are closing. Diesel fuel is $4.75 a gallon and meth is plaguing our communities. But all we can worry about it gay marriage and whether it is legal or not. First off it only affects a small percentage of the population that either want to get married or are vehemently opposed to it. If they are of legal age and want to get married why not. They can be miserable like the 50% of straight marriages that end in divorce. On the other hand they get full domestic partner benefits now so who cares whether they can get married. This entire issue is just fluff instead of dealing with real problems facing our State.
Imagine...
Post a Comment