religion and spirituality

I separate the concepts of “religion” or “being religious” from that of the “spiritual” or “spirituality”. To me religion is the attempts of humankind to construct a vehicle or some sort of device in order to acquiesce that which is contrived to be the divine. All too often these being the manipulations of the “few” to manage or control those less confident in their own relationship to whatever it may be which they conceive as divinity, and there not being any fool proof absolute of what constitutes divinity and the lack of acknowledged absolutes being taught, has left the general state of the human condition regarding the subject virtually void. There is an “anything goes” sort of approach to things religious and spiritual. He who is most persistent and often the loudest and dominant is perceived as being the most “together” in their knowledge and relationship to divinity, assuming that there is such an entity. And these, by virtue of their own imaginations, often reinforced by historic, generally acknowledged scripture to which a culture looks to and relies on, create their own ideal of what is spiritual and that faith which is most beneficial in relating the divine in the context of their community. These are the demagogues and manipulators of the minds of humanity, preying on the ignorance of the majority and ultimately retarding the natural evolution of consciousness, and all that which is the human species.

 Spirituality or existence as a spiritual being on the other hand is a totally different thing. It is not tied to or dependent upon any contrivance of religious notion, although may contribute to some religious development. Being is the only qualification associated with such existence. One may call one’s self by any number of religious ideologies, or even deny such or any divinity, they are really irrelevant. The closest we, as human beings, may understand this “spirituality” is in the fact of our awareness of being or “consciousness”. This is a state I believe all can acknowledge, although I must admit an ignorance to the fact that states of unconsciousness do exist, which in the longer run must be included and may shed an even greater illumination upon our understanding of what is our nature as humans, as beings and possibly as the divine. I admit I seek answers to questions which as a human being may never be realized, yet I do so as endowed with an unquenchable desire to come all the closer to the “truth”, not knowing what that may entail or whether such even exists or even whether having found it I would desire it. These are irrelevancies.

 Although I perceive demagogues dominating the religious environment, denomination or sect not being relevant but rather different shades of varying colors, it should not be assumed that I consider the originators of various religious platforms as such. These I find, for the most part, to have been well meaning initiators of doctrine and dogma transcending the once commonly held orthodoxy. Yet this does not preclude the fact that imaginative charlatans have in the past and continue to pervert commonly held religious notions to their own advantage. The primary problem is that as doctrine and dogma have been elevated and sanctified, they are championed by second and third generation adherents as being their actual experience, when in fact they are the hand me down religious thinking of predecessors, long gone and far removed from the actual fact, and what is promoted is not in actual fact firsthand experience. The doctrine of the experience has lost its meaning and effectiveness. It is effectively to be relegated to the realm of legend. Only firsthand actual experience is of value as being the closest thing to objective truth. And yet even this is not without possible criticism, as the state of human perception is anything but absolute and untainted by subjective preference. The reality being pure objectivity does not exist, at least, not as may be comprehended by human sense and reason.

 Recognizing and stating all this does not make for sufficient reason not to continue seeking, for only by seeking is it possible to grow that much closer to that which “IS”. The fault as it exists is not in the seeking, but rather (1) in the ambition of those who would exploit to their advantage what is newly realized, and (2) with the vast numbers (if not actually the majority) who find it too inconvenient and too much effort to actually use their minds to do the mental work requisite to consider and analyze what it is they are mentally consuming and allowing to influence them.

 Being of different opinions regarding truth and what may (or may not) constitute a thing is not the issue, but rather the unwillingness to set aside one’s own ideas in order to more fully appreciate those of another. This does not mean adopting another’s views and ideas, but having the mental and psychological fortitude to see an issue as perceived from the vantage of another with differing perspective, and then if and as needed evaluate and critique such, stepping back into ones original position. Such, means taking a risk that one’s own values and world view may be affected and altered in the process. Many find this a fearful thing. These are those who without due process of thought adopt into religious and political ideologies of the status quo. I have found, by accident of experience, that I am not one of these. By accident of experience I do not mean that I set out to be such, but rather through life’s experiences found this is me, the way I am. Too be sure, mistakes have been made, but life has a way of getting one back on track or correcting direction, if one is of a mind to pay attention and not give up. This also does not mean that life is resolved in a manner which would please others, but rather I am established to be more focused on what it is that constitutes me as a human being. Is there an end to it? I rather think not, but cannot say with absolute certainty.