Religious outfits as anathema on religion
Religious organizations, whether radical, reformist, moderate, and what have you, all influence the minds of people. If they cannot influence they will have a natural death.
It is not so much a question of such organizations influencing the minds as people getting sucked into such organizations. Recall Marx's classic statement that religion is the opium of the masses.
For argument sake, it is necessary to separate religion from religious organizations. The basic tenets of all institutionalized religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam, are more or less the same. That is, human and social well-being.
When one looks at the evolution of religions, the purpose of all religions is again the same. What is important to remember is religion is THE CREATION OF MAN FOR THE WELL-BEING OF MANKIND, and not dropped down to a set of people from the sky, as the aircrafts drop food packets to calamity stricken areas.
As societies have progressed over the years much of the initial apprehensions of the mankind have disappeared, and hence much of what might have gone into religious tenets of an archaic past are now irrelevant.
Religion per se is harmless if it is borne in mind that religion is man's creation for man's well-being, and has to change in keeping with the changes in society.
One need not be dogmatic in one's belief. In fact, most believers are not dogmatic. They have been adjusting. Otherwise the various Internet channels cannot have astrology as one of its money-spinners. This is only one striking example.
Religious organizations are, in some sense, an anathema on religion. And therein is a deepening paradox and contradiction. I am referring to organizations such as of Sai Baba (I do not like to call him Sathya (Truth), and more importantly, organizations such as the RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal, or in brief the Sangh Parivar which represent the lunatic fringe of Hinduism as a religion and as a community of people.
When one separates religion from religious organizations, then the cultural vandalism of the Talibans - a classic case of Islam hurting Islam - in Afghanistan by destroying the Buddha statues strikes one as madness, as aberration. The act has hardly anything to do with religion other than the fact that the destroyers were Muslims.
True believers harmonize belief practices with society. True believers do not need statues or icons. True belief in religion is like observing a new-born baby in all its playful innocence, watching the vast expanse of a serene sea, or a starlit sky, or reading a really creative novel. The idea is peace unto oneself and peace with others.
Seen thus religion has an important social function, though not the myriad religious organizations, which do more harm than good to religion, believers, and society. It is heartening that leaving aside the Hindutva's lunatic fringe, India reacted to the cultural vandalism in Afghanistan with all the fortitude at its command; and by and large India's Muslim fraternity condemned it in unequivocal terms.
What happened in Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on and the fall of the WTC in the US cannot be construed as nemesis catching up with the Talibans. Replacing the Afghan regime by force by the US and its allies was in the realm of imperialism and politics, though religion could have been used as an instrument for it. So also, the ruinous regime change in Iraq. This political game and related international gamble should be the scope of a more exhaustive study.
It is not so much a question of such organizations influencing the minds as people getting sucked into such organizations. Recall Marx's classic statement that religion is the opium of the masses.
For argument sake, it is necessary to separate religion from religious organizations. The basic tenets of all institutionalized religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam, are more or less the same. That is, human and social well-being.
When one looks at the evolution of religions, the purpose of all religions is again the same. What is important to remember is religion is THE CREATION OF MAN FOR THE WELL-BEING OF MANKIND, and not dropped down to a set of people from the sky, as the aircrafts drop food packets to calamity stricken areas.
As societies have progressed over the years much of the initial apprehensions of the mankind have disappeared, and hence much of what might have gone into religious tenets of an archaic past are now irrelevant.
Religion per se is harmless if it is borne in mind that religion is man's creation for man's well-being, and has to change in keeping with the changes in society.
One need not be dogmatic in one's belief. In fact, most believers are not dogmatic. They have been adjusting. Otherwise the various Internet channels cannot have astrology as one of its money-spinners. This is only one striking example.
Religious organizations are, in some sense, an anathema on religion. And therein is a deepening paradox and contradiction. I am referring to organizations such as of Sai Baba (I do not like to call him Sathya (Truth), and more importantly, organizations such as the RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal, or in brief the Sangh Parivar which represent the lunatic fringe of Hinduism as a religion and as a community of people.
When one separates religion from religious organizations, then the cultural vandalism of the Talibans - a classic case of Islam hurting Islam - in Afghanistan by destroying the Buddha statues strikes one as madness, as aberration. The act has hardly anything to do with religion other than the fact that the destroyers were Muslims.
True believers harmonize belief practices with society. True believers do not need statues or icons. True belief in religion is like observing a new-born baby in all its playful innocence, watching the vast expanse of a serene sea, or a starlit sky, or reading a really creative novel. The idea is peace unto oneself and peace with others.
Seen thus religion has an important social function, though not the myriad religious organizations, which do more harm than good to religion, believers, and society. It is heartening that leaving aside the Hindutva's lunatic fringe, India reacted to the cultural vandalism in Afghanistan with all the fortitude at its command; and by and large India's Muslim fraternity condemned it in unequivocal terms.
What happened in Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on and the fall of the WTC in the US cannot be construed as nemesis catching up with the Talibans. Replacing the Afghan regime by force by the US and its allies was in the realm of imperialism and politics, though religion could have been used as an instrument for it. So also, the ruinous regime change in Iraq. This political game and related international gamble should be the scope of a more exhaustive study.
© Author
posted by prk1949 @ 1:18 pm
0 comments
