Upendra Varma wrote:
I talked of the Pope because his death gave me an opportunity to muse over certain things spiritual in nature. The media repeatedly talked of him as the shepherd of the believers. I have always considered myself to be a believer, of course with my own conditions. But I haven't for a moment thought of myself as a follower of Christianity, let alone the Catholic Church. Let me make one thing clear. I am not attributing any motive to the usage of this expression. I wouldn't even dream of an insinuation that this is a deliberate ploy to bring all believers in the world under the umbrella of the Papal order. No. But the usage of this word opens up some new avenues of thought which may be a trifle interesting.
Let us first assume that most of us believe in something connected with God. To give an example, I am a Hindu. I don't know how I qualified to be a Hindu. Nobody taught me anything about Hinduism. So I can't say I was inspired by the greatness of that religion before I took the plunge. My family being Hindus decided that I too am a Hindu and brought me up teaching me Hindu tenets and an ambience of Hindu thoughts permeated my consciousness. One thing was obvious. There was no pressure on me simply because at such an early age you don't do any great deal of resistance. More often than not, one tends to accept what is offered to him at a stage when you know only to accept things. Thus I grew up to be a Hindu, grabbing a little bit of Hinduism all along. But talking about me, I don't know whether I am a good Hindu or whether my religion is the best that is available in the world. I am destined to live and die as a Hindu blinkered by the absence of any sense of comparative religion. I don't even know if I am happy about it.
But I am sure of one thing. Almost everybody is quite certain that the religion that one is cocooned by is the best for him and more importantly for everybody else. I am sure of one more thing. I don't want to open a can of dangerous worms by making an attempt to break into areas held sacrosanct by the unspoken apostles of various religions. What I am more interested in is on different track. Which also allows me to a walk down the alley of religious options.
When do you become a follower of a particular religion? Opinions, I am sure will differ but that only means that I am also allowed to hold on to my perception and the avenues of thought it opens up. Is it when you are conceived? Or when you are born? Or when some family adopts you? None of these options looks convincing to me. This is not much different from getting admitted to a school quite randomly without any enquiry about the school, its faculty or its infrastructure. Also not much different from marrying someone you meet for the first time. This casual nature of having a religion without knowing what it is, not even its basics is rather naïve if an understatement is allowed. But this is the only major way people and religion are connected. I concede I don't have a clue how this aberration can be corrected. One way might be to allow one to keep in hold his becoming a member of a religion for a while. During this period, a healthy exposure to a comparative study of various religions, may give him a better picture and one can, with a better perspective, choose his religious pursuit. He can refrain himself from embracing any religion also. That sounds a much better idea to me, definitely much better than one's becoming a Hindu just because his father was a Hindu. There could be several more sensible suggestions but I don't for a second believe that birth ought to have much to do with religion. It is as avoidable as your becoming a Republican because your father is a supporter of the GOP.
Where Is Religion Headed For?
Sorry for the long delay. The art of keeping a blog going is being learnt the hard way.
Last time, I wondered about the dynamics of one's having his religion. It was and still is a thought which disturbs me because even after centuries of interaction with religion and after centuries of exposure to the possible dangerous interpretations of what is right and what is not, we have not been able to be wiser in that area. But my intention was not to go into the maladies that have crept into all religions, I just wanted to wonder how a newborn deserves to be a Christian or a Hindu.
There of course were various shades of opinions on that and related issues but at least a small group joined me in my dissatisfaction with the present arrangement of random religion. But as religious faith may be termed a deep rooted prejudice, any idea which may not directly endorse the official line, will be resisted. Not because it is illogical but because the religious officialdom will not just accept it. The fundamental belief of the faithful is that he will receive the nod of the Heaven and that has to be his ultimate aim. So not surprisingly, the parameters he will adopt for his interpretation of even developments in the realm of science, are soaked in the day-to-day religious practices. Though almost all religions are on a sticky wicket when it comes to science, they never hesitate to come to conclusions about which they are not exactly well-informed. Often they find it even difficult to formulate a consistent policy towards issues like stem cell research. Course correction of course is one thing and showing one's back to the unavoidable march of applied knowledge, another.
Even educated people adopt a very unscientific methodology in tackling issues which are even distantly related to religion. They don't use their scientific background to analyse the issues involved in it and unnecessarily bring in narrow religious values to examine them. Even considerations like the possible posturing of other religions may influence them. We know that the influence of religion has been waning gradually in the western world. That does not mean they are not religious any more. They are but they refuse to accept the religious establishment's interpretation of various issues vital to them. This is not a feature of the western society alone. This is happening everywhere where people have been blessed with modern education.
The ideal state of affairs when faith is endorsed by reason and questioning has not yet dawned. Wested interests operating at a level where narrow and dry religious practices don't allow spirituality to breeze in. There is a saying that spirituality begins where religion ends. Money and lack of concern about others' beliefs in suffifient doses, would see to it that spirituality is never allowed in. Bertrand Russel said that he was not going to die for his convictions. Simply because even he was not sure how correct they were! A few more Russels and this world would have been a much better place to live in.
Last time, I wondered about the dynamics of one's having his religion. It was and still is a thought which disturbs me because even after centuries of interaction with religion and after centuries of exposure to the possible dangerous interpretations of what is right and what is not, we have not been able to be wiser in that area. But my intention was not to go into the maladies that have crept into all religions, I just wanted to wonder how a newborn deserves to be a Christian or a Hindu.
There of course were various shades of opinions on that and related issues but at least a small group joined me in my dissatisfaction with the present arrangement of random religion. But as religious faith may be termed a deep rooted prejudice, any idea which may not directly endorse the official line, will be resisted. Not because it is illogical but because the religious officialdom will not just accept it. The fundamental belief of the faithful is that he will receive the nod of the Heaven and that has to be his ultimate aim. So not surprisingly, the parameters he will adopt for his interpretation of even developments in the realm of science, are soaked in the day-to-day religious practices. Though almost all religions are on a sticky wicket when it comes to science, they never hesitate to come to conclusions about which they are not exactly well-informed. Often they find it even difficult to formulate a consistent policy towards issues like stem cell research. Course correction of course is one thing and showing one's back to the unavoidable march of applied knowledge, another.
Even educated people adopt a very unscientific methodology in tackling issues which are even distantly related to religion. They don't use their scientific background to analyse the issues involved in it and unnecessarily bring in narrow religious values to examine them. Even considerations like the possible posturing of other religions may influence them. We know that the influence of religion has been waning gradually in the western world. That does not mean they are not religious any more. They are but they refuse to accept the religious establishment's interpretation of various issues vital to them. This is not a feature of the western society alone. This is happening everywhere where people have been blessed with modern education.
The ideal state of affairs when faith is endorsed by reason and questioning has not yet dawned. Wested interests operating at a level where narrow and dry religious practices don't allow spirituality to breeze in. There is a saying that spirituality begins where religion ends. Money and lack of concern about others' beliefs in suffifient doses, would see to it that spirituality is never allowed in. Bertrand Russel said that he was not going to die for his convictions. Simply because even he was not sure how correct they were! A few more Russels and this world would have been a much better place to live in.
0 comments:
Post a Comment