I originally wrote this in 2005, in response to someone who had asked me to explain in further detail my beliefs concerning the difference between Spirituality and Religion. This is the whole text, except where I called the person by name, and requested he not be sarcastic in asking for further information.
Formating has been edited from that in the original email to facilitate ease of reading.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Besides, I said "a" path towards enlightenment.. not "the" path.
I
no more believe that there is a single path to enlightenment than I
believe that there is any singular manner of "correctly" practicing BDSM
as kink, or any single way of perceiving a dominant/submissive dynamic
between any given individuals. (Do I believe that there is "one right
way" for ME? certainly - unfortunately, that right way for me seems to
be directly at odds with the "right way" for practically everyone else
who is part of the human species, especially those who are most caught
up in the conventionality of definitions and roles!)
I am not,
specifically, an atheist - a better term would perhaps be agnostic (the
jury still isn't in, for lack of sufficient evidence in either
direction) or more likely eclectic Gnostic. I do acknowledge that there is potentially a "higher"
entity. Not "god" in the sense that religion would have us to believe -
some anthropomorphized, better than human human. But something so
outside the realm of current human comprehension that it could very well
be "god like" in it's capacity for creation, foresight, and knowledge.
Ascribing human emotions, human motivations, or human concerns - even a
concern for humanity - to such an entity has always seemed to
me to be a two fold problem of species ego combined with some bizarre
need to limit things to the easily comprehensible. Here, we go back to
that age old instinctive Fear response when faced with the unknown or
incomprehensible. Relegate it to terms, and conditions, which even the
simplest mind can understand and you remove much of the fear.
Am
I necessarily "fit" to determine who
is and who isn't on a path towards enlightenment? Obviously not, since
I'm simply another human being.
Do I have a better than average grasp
on the difference between Spirituality and Religion? I like to think I
do, simply from the amount of time I've spent on the subject as part of
my philosophical/esoteric/paranormal studies. I am, however, by no
means Through with those studies nor do I ever expect to BE through with
them. There's simply to much material out there to be easily covered
in a single lifetime. I'm definitely NOT a Religious person, and haven't
been since I reached an age of self determination and ability to study
for myself. I rejected Christianity - along with Judaism, Islam, and
all other forms of organized, clearly defined, and restrictive religious
view - once I'd done sufficient study on my own to know that they were
all simply too limiting in the greater scope of existence.
I
reached That point by the time I was 12, btw.... I was fortunate in
having parents who encouraged my study of a wide variety of religious
viewpoints, and who insisted that I question, and then search until I
found satisfactory answers to those questions. I've read the bible
cover to cover, as well as doing some of my own translation work from
the original Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew. (Did that as a joint project
with my father at the age of 17, during summer break from school between
my sophomore and junior years.)
I've read the Koran through from cover
to cover, though I have yet to get around to doing any of my own
translation work on that from the original Aramaic. (Someday,
eventually, when I have time and don't have 20billion other irons in the
fire lol) I've studied several of the Krishnic and Hindu texts, though
not as extensively as I'd like to. (Again - someday, hopefully lol)
I've put
in time studying various texts that have been specifically Excluded
from the Judaeo-Christian bible, most of which were deleted during the
conclaves held in the reign of Constantine. (A man who murdered his
wife and son; made lunar sects, prophecy and private meditation illegal;
and then adopted Christianity as his "official" religion just before
death out of fear that one of the sects he had wiped out <"the pure"
is what they called themselves, devotes of a spider deity, actually>
were actually correct about certain things, after encouraging the
erection of temples to himself and an association between himself and
the sun. His political dictates played a significant role in what was -
and what wasn't - included in the officially sanctioned texts that were
included in the current bible.)
And I've spent a lot of time studying
the works of early philosophers and some of the less than conventional
'lunar' religions that are often lumped under the heading of
"new age" or 'pagan' religions.
At
it's core - religion is a tool towards teaching the outer mysteries to
the masses while maintaining control over those masses. The "outer"
mysteries being those things available easily to all, especially those
who do not desire to spend time delving into the Inner mysteries - those
things which go beyond simple acceptance and faith, to plumb the depths
of that which is not as easily perceived.
Religion, because of it's
placement of the inner mysteries outside the Comprehension of all but a
chosen few Elite (as in a priesthood) to lead the rest, strives not to
teach - but to contain and control. In effect, it protects the status quo
and strives to continue protecting and maintaining it, even (or perhaps
Especially) at the expense of those it claims to shelter from
"dangerous" knowledge.
And by setting a large portion of knowledge
outside
the bounds of humanity, it maintains that control, enforcing it with
warnings of dire consequences (such as "hell" in the mythos of Judaeo-Christianity and other religious offshoots of early Judaism.)
When it cannot maintain control through psychological manipulation of
the mass (those "warnings") it takes matters a step further, proclaiming
things to be "heretical".... "forbidden".... dangerous..... and
directly punishing offenders to the status quo - traditionally by means
of death either through military campaign (crusades) or torture
(inquisitions). This routine of crusade/inquisition has not been
limited strictly to the Judaic offspring, though it has decidedly been
more Common with all religions in the ages since Constantine.
Knowledge has
always been dangerous to the auspices of the "Church" (whatever church
that might be) because it removes the Necessity for intermediaries to
stand between Common Man and The Universe. If you and I are just as
capable of
learning Greater Truths as some elite priesthood, what need do we have
in the long view to maintain that priesthood as a thing apart - special,
elevated, and somehow "better" than average?
No need - so the
priesthood is dissolved, and control is lost over the masses. Throughout
history, those attacked most fiercely by Religion have been those who
rejected the control of religion, and those who endorsed doing their own
thinking and philosophical searching.
Inherently,
spirituality touches on those Truths that have been traditionally
guarded by an elite priesthood.
Truths of what mankind's place is in
the greater scheme of things, truths of purpose, truths of understanding
our interdependent relationships both with each other and with the rest
of the universe around us.
At it's core, spirituality searches for
greater purpose, and strives to Individually define our roles
within life. It helps us, as human beings, to determine where
everything "fits" so to speak. It answers the "Whys" of existence, in
greater or lesser detail, as each individual determines their own need
to know the "why."
It acknowledges, in various ways, that mankind is
NOT the ultimate on the evolutionary scales, nor the master of all
knowledge and creation. It acknowledges, through it's questioning and
the answers derived from those questions, that there are things that we
have not yet learned - either individually or as a species - about how
our universe works. And it strives in it's way to progress from that
point of lack of knowledge to a greater understanding and harmony with
what Is, and what Works.
Spirituality
requires the facility.. and the time.. for philosophical searching on
an individual level. Religion denies the need for such self searching,
and
discourages philosophical endeavors for any outside that chosen elite.
Spirituality dictates questioning life, self, authority, convention. Religion discourages questioning of authority, and loathes the desire of
the philosophical to step outside the bounds of convention. (It is,
after all, disruptive to the status quo and the power base of the elite
to do such questioning or to refute convention.)
Can
religion LEAD to spirituality? Yes, at least to a limited extent. The
problem which crops up is that a reliance on religion teaches people to
Continue relying upon religion for their answers. It kills the drive
to explore potentials and possibilities, and encourages a lack of
thought, a lack of questioning - a total acceptance (on faith and
insufficient knowledge) of what one is told to believe.
Some people,
obviously, are satisfied with that, and lack the drive
to look beyond what they're told to believe. They will, in my personal
opinion, always be rather limited in what they are capable of
comprehending, simply because they have given up the tendency towards
further exploration. Only time itself will determine whether I'm
correct or incorrect in my hypothesis about their spiritual
limitations... and I'm neither bold enough, nor vain enough, to rule out
the possibility that I could be completely off the mark in such
thinking.
Can spirituality lead to Religion? Not typically, in my
opinion, simply because once a person starts on a path of spiritual
enlightenment which isn't held in check by a specific religious dictate -
they rapidly outgrow the limiting nature of such dictates. While it's
remotely possible, it's highly unlikely.
