Posted inReligions

No religion in National Spelling Bee

Over on HinesSight I mused today about how the three finalists in the National Spelling Bee competition, who apparently were all ethnic Indians, didn’t display any sign of religion on the stage. There was no “Praise Vishnu!” or “I owe it all to Shiva,” thank God. More and more it’s seeming to me that religiosity has virtually nothing to do with life. Real life. Religion won’t help you become a spelling champion. Diligent study will. A supportive family will. High intelligence will. The competitors I saw on ESPN enjoyed the benefits of each. What got them to the spelling bee…
No Comments
Posted inBuddhism Religions Science

Western religions holding back stem cell research

Watching “Nightline” a few days ago, I was pleased to find an expert supporting my contention that religion is at the root of the reason why the United States is falling behind other nations in crucial health care research. In my “God must be a Buddhist” post I argued that the Western monotheistic religions have more of a problem with absorbing scientific facts into their worldviews than do Eastern faiths such as Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism. Thus recent breakthroughs in embryonic therapeutic cloning occurred in South Korea, not the United States, because irrational tenets of fundamentalist Christianity have resulted in…
No Comments
Posted inRadha Soami Satsang Beas Reality Religions

What’s wrong with faith?

I’m often asked, generally by myself, “What’s wrong with faith? Doesn’t faith help us get through tough times and feel positive about the future?” Here’s how I answer, generally to myself: “Faith is fine when it points toward objective reality. But when faith keeps us revolving in the merry-go-round of subjective conceptions, it’s dangerous and should be discarded." Never passing up an opportunity to quote myself, this is how I discussed the issue in my book, “Return to the One”: The scientific method, by and large, is founded on the first assumption [“I’ll believe it when I see it”]: what…
5
Posted inReality Religions Science

Knowledge, belief, and feathered dinosaurs

Let’s say you believe in creationism or “intelligent design,” as creationists now like to call their addled explanation of how living beings came to be. You don’t accept evolution. Everything was created all at once by a supreme being that knew exactly what he/she/it wanted to do and did it just right the first time around. Then you are confronted with solid evidence of feathered dinosaurs—a fossil dinosaur covered head to tail with downy fluff and primitive feathers. Evolutionary theory predicted that birds evolved from dinosaurs and, ta-da!, the hypothesis has been confirmed. As paleontologist Mark Norell says, “Dinosaurs are…
2
Posted inDeath/Rebirth Religions

Maui musings on the Pope’s passing

Fairly brief Maui musings, for Laurel and I leave tomorrow to return home after our vacation here on the shores of Napili Bay. We haven’t experienced any grand spiritual visions while lying on the beach, boogie boarding, snorkeling, and shopping. However, it has been interesting to reflect upon the Pope’s passing from our more detached perspective here on Maui. More detached, that is, in comparison to our habitual immersion in cable news, two daily newspapers, and talk radio. We have followed the Pope’s death and mourning period only via quick reads of the local newspaper’s front page and glances at…
1
Posted inReligions Spiritual practice/meditation

Why don’t religions evolve?

Every night I read a chapter from Richard Dawkin’s marvelous new book: “The Ancestor’s Tale: A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Evolution.” Dawkin’s tale starts with us, Homo sapiens, and traces our evolutionary path backward in time through each divergence from a common ancestor, or Concestor. It just takes 39 steps, or rendezvous’, to meet up with the primal Eubacteria. This is as distant from modern humans as Dawkins goes; our nearest ancestors, whom we meet at Rendezvous 1 between 5 and 7 million years ago, are chimpanzees and bonobos—with whom we share Concestor 1. People are far more evolved…
1
Posted inReligions Spiritual practice/meditation Universe

Meditating like an extra-terrestrial

What sort of spirituality would be practiced by an extra-terrestrial being? I find this an interesting question, one which points to a more practical question: “What sort of spirituality should be practiced by us right here on earth?” Many people have pondered how the world’s religions would be affected by the discovery of extra-terrestrial life—particularly life from a civilization much more advanced than ours. Physicist Paul Davies, in his article “E.T. and God,” observes that Christianity would have the biggest problem with the discovery of alien superbeings because “of all the world’s major religions, Christianity is the most species-specific.” Jesus…
2
Posted inReligions

The Rambling Taoist

I’m pleased to recommend a weblog, The Rambling Taoist, about my recently chosen faith. Sometimes I forget that I became a Taoist last October. Trey Smith, the Taoist who does the rambling, helps to remind me why I did. Of course, since the impulse for my conversion was forgetting something, I suspect that the more I forget about Taoism the better Taoist I will be.

Trey writes about both worldly and philosophical matters. He preaches the virtues of being non-dogmatic, progressive, compassionate, flexible, open.

I like his weblog’s tagline: The predominant perspective in the western world is derived from a Judeo-Christian viewpoint. This has led to dualism; people have become estranged from the environment, each other and themselves. This blog is written by a Taoist. See if you can discern a difference.

I can. Below I’ve copied in one of Trey’s thought-provoking posts (February 26, 2005) about the unity that underlies diversity. Trey lives in Salem, Oregon like me. I’m looking forward to meeting him. The Church of the Churchless and The Rambling Taoist seem to look upon reality in a similar fashion.

No Comments
Posted inReligions Science

Best religion: reality. Worst religion: faith

I always enjoy getting a message from my favorite (and, really, only) regular Christian correspondent, Steve. He sent a thoughtful response to my post, “Reason unites, faith divides.” I’ll include it in its entirety as a continuation to this post. Steve is so reasonable, I certainly don’t include him in my category of Closed-Minded Religious Faithful—they who ignore unmistakable immediate reality in favor of unproven faith in what may lie beyond what is known now.

I agree with Steve that “science is but a limited tool,” so long as it “doesn’t deal with things outside the natural, physical realm.” This was one of the central themes of my first book, “God’s Whisper, Creation’s Thunder.” Since science doesn’t know whether the essence of ultimate reality is material (physical) or non-material (spiritual), it needs to be open to any and all possibilities about what lies at the root of manifest existence.

So if “religion” means embracing really real reality, sign me up. But I don’t want any substitutes for the Real Thing. Give me the truth about the cosmos, or give me nothing. And this is what faith is, compared to truth: nothing. It’s a hope, theory, hypothesis, conjecture, wish, desire—whatever you want to call it. Whatever, it isn’t the real deal: something directly experienced.

Last Sunday I gave a talk to our local Radha Soami Satsang Beas group on this very subject. I heartily agreed with a statement by Lekh Raj Puri in his book Radha Swami Teachings: “True faith is that which is based on one’s inner transcendent spiritual realization. In that faith there is no scope for doubt; it is faith in true transcendent knowledge; it is real and reliable faith.”

But this definition of faith is far distant from what people usually mean by the term. Puri’s “faith” is precisely what I call “reality,” something directly and truly experienced. By contrast, the criticism which Sam Harris has of faith, which I echo here in the Church of the Churchless, is that shaky beliefs are mistaken for rock-solid truth. Worse, most people of faith (but not Steve) expect that other people should think and act like they do.

Steve correctly notes that “Science is not immune to folly or arrogance.” However, scientists don’t try to force their beliefs on other people, and scientists also have to offer solid evidence for the correctness of their beliefs (theories). Without such evidence, no one is expected to give those beliefs any credibility. Many religious faithful, though, expect that their unfounded beliefs about creationism, homosexuality, stem cell research, and so on will be treated seriously by society.

Sam Harris writes:

Imagine that we could revive a well-educated Christian of the 14th century. He would prove to be a total ignoramus, except on matters of faith. His beliefs about geography, astronomy, and medicine would embarrass even a child, but he would know everything there is to know about God. We could explain this in two ways: Either we perfected our religious understanding a millennium ago—while our knowledge on other fronts was still hopelessly inchoate—or religion, being the mere maintenance of dogma, is one area of discourse that does not admit of progress. The fact is, with each passing year religious dogma conserves less of the data of human experience. By this measure the entire project of religion seems perfectly backward.

By and large, I agree. Yet I encourage you to read Steve’s message, which presents religion and faith in a more favorable light. Each to his own.

2
Posted inPolitics Religions

Reason unites, faith divides

Religious believers tend to assume that if more people had faith, the world would be so much better. Actually, it would be worse. For faith divides and reason unites. If our goal is a peaceful, harmonious, productive, safe world, reason will get us closer to what we want and faith will take us further away. This is the central theme of Sam Harris’ excellent book, “The End of Faith,” which I’ve written about before. His opening chapter is called “Reason in Exile.” It’s a devastatingly accurate critique of faith-based religions. In other words, all religions. For a “religion” founded on…
4
Posted inReligions

Living in the Mystery

Here's a thoughtful and well-written post, "Living in the Mystery," from a relatively new weblog in Corvallis, The Yoga Loft. I heartily agree with this thought: I am always curious about someone who tells me without solicitation "I am a Christian" or "I am a Buddhist." They use this as a shield to keep people out, and to try and convince others that they hold the corner on something powerful. All too true.
1
Posted inBooks Humor Religions

Hell joke’s serious side

A friend recently emailed me the “Chemistry of hell” joke that has been circulating on the Internet for years, though I couldn’t recall having seen it before. The version that I got is in the continuation to this post. The joke seems to be evolving, as it now has a nice “Oh, my God!” paragraph at the end that earlier versions didn’t have.

As humorous as this story is, it has some deep philosophy in it. Notably, the idea that since most religions state that anyone who isn’t a member of that faith is going to hell, and few (if any) people belong to every religion in the world, then everyone is going to hell.

I thought of this joke as I was reading a message from a Muslim student who attended a lecture by Sam Harris. Harris wrote “The End of Faith,” a book that I praised on my other weblog after reading only 30 pages. After finishing the book, my initial favorable impression only grew stronger.

As the student writes, Harris boldly attacks all religions as being equally non-sensical and opposed to a truly spiritual view of the world, fellow human beings, and ourselves. What made me think about hell is her observation that bodyguards were present during Harris’ talk. Would a scientist who criticized an unfounded theory need protection from those who believed in it?

Hell isn’t a real place like Death Valley in the summertime. It is the manmade creation of religions. It is as real as the irrational untested beliefs of religious fundamentalists. Yet this illusion has its all-too-real effects: people who question religious dogma need bodyguards to protect them from believers in a loving God.

To me, this absurdity is what’s truly hellish.

1
Posted inGod Reality Religions

Why bad tsunamis happen to good people

“Why?” is a many-faceted word when it comes to disasters. Science can tell us the physical reasons why the tsunami hit South and Southeast Asia, but people in the area (and elsewhere) also want answers to broader questions: Why us? Why here? Why now? These are queries in an article by Kenneth Wordward in the January 10 issue of Newsweek: “Countless Souls Cry Out to God.” The article describes how survivors of four faiths, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and Christianity, are variously conceiving the metaphysical meaning of the tsunami cataclysm. The Hindu inhabitants of poor fishing communities don’t have sophisticated theological…
No Comments
Posted inGod Radha Soami Satsang Beas Religions

Start worrying about your religion if…

After reading my last post, a friend enquired about whether any lightning strikes have been observed heading for my increasingly faithless soul. He was joking. But the vision of bolts from heaven being thrown at the unfaithful got me thinking: Isn’t it strange that, jokingly or not, we can entertain the idea that a God who supposedly is so much better than us also can be imagined as so much worse? I make no claims about possessing any divine qualities. But if you disagree with me, almost certainly I won’t get mad at you. Peeved maybe, but not mad. So…
9
Posted inChristianity/Jesus Religions

Brother of Jesus ossuary hoax

Poof! There goes one of the few pieces of evidence that Jesus actually existed, a two thousand year-old box inscribed with “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.” A few days ago Israel indicted four antiquities collectors for forging artifacts, among them this ossuary that supposedly contained the bones of Jesus’ brother.

What intrigues me most about this story is what it says about Christianity. The discovery of this box a few years ago was big news. Not so much for its archaeological significance, as a “60 Minutes” piece about the ossuary that we saw recently said that these burial boxes are commonplace. Rows of them were shown stacked in some museum storage area.

Rather, interest in the “James, brother of Jesus” ossuary was extreme because it would have been the earliest evidence outside of the Bible of Jesus’ existence. Christianity is nothing without Jesus, so if the ossuary were real, this would have offered indirect proof of the reality of the religion whose core is Christ. But the inscription on the box wasn’t real. So Christianity remains resting on a shaky foundation of gospel accounts whose veracity never can be proven.

Is this any way to run a religion? The Western religions—Christianity, Islam, Judaism—are dependent on revelations. If people—Jesus, Muhammad, Moses—hadn’t revealed the nature of God to the faithful there wouldn’t be any substance to those faiths. So the historical existence of these founders is central to the theology of each religion. Imagine Christianity without Jesus, Islam without Muhammad, Judaism without Moses. Would you still have a vital religion?

On the other hand, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Taoism are pleasingly complete without the presence of any particular human revelation. Though bearing the name of the Buddha, even Buddhism can stand comfortably on its own without leaning on the person once known as Siddhartha Gautama. Buddhists say, “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him?” Can Christians say the same about Jesus?

A religion should be able to provide universal answers to universal questions. What is the nature of God or ultimate reality? How can this highest truth be known? What is the relation of human beings, us, to existence as a whole, the cosmos? If answers to such queries can only come through the unique experience of particular people, then they aren’t real answers.

Science is much wiser in this regard. Physicists don’t worship Einstein because he revealed the theory of relativity. The laws of nature are independent of anyone’s knowledge about them. If Einstein hadn’t discovered the relativistic nature of space and time, someone else would have.

Similarly, a true spiritual science doesn’t focus on the “professor” who teaches about divine truth. This prophet, master, guru, saint, guide—whatever you want to call him or her—is separate from the truth being taught. Reality exists whether or not someone is speaking or writing about it.

Christianity, if it is true, should be independent of Jesus Christ. That statement will sound strange to most Christians, which indicates how shaky is the foundation of Christianity. If the rock-bottom truth of the cosmos is considered to depend on whether a particular person really lived and died two thousand years ago, then we haven’t gotten down to the heart of reality.

Here’s an article from the New York Times about the hoax:

6
Posted inReality Religions Science

Reality is the best religion

Is religion isn’t real, what good is it? Not much. Admittedly, believing in something that isn’t real can make you feel better and offer consolation when life is tough. It is easier to accept a tragedy if this is taken to be “God’s will.” And instead of feeling powerless to change an unfortunate situation, many people embrace prayer as a way to call a higher power into action. Similarly, children ask Santa Claus to bring them presents from the North Pole. They also put newly lost baby teeth under their pillows and expect that the Tooth Fairy will reward them.…
24
Posted inFundamentalism Radha Soami Satsang Beas Religions

Religion should unite, not divide

Laurel, my wife, was moved to write a meaningful short essay yesterday: “Religion Should Unite, Not Divide.” Like me, she’s been disturbed by all the fundamentalist-inspired divisiveness evident of late. Well, also evident of early, for as long as there has been religion, there has been religious intolerance and inhumanity.

We both believe that the only way to be spiritual is to be non-religious. Religion is mostly about belief; spirituality is mostly about experience. A disturbingly large percentage of purportedly religious people don’t practice what they preach. They claim to aspire to unconditional love, then vote to discriminate against homosexuals. They claim to renounce unjustified killing, then proudly support the slaughter of innocent people in Iraq.

Laurel says in her piece that if the unity of God truly is the goal to which religious believers aspire, then churches and other places of worship should be an earthly reflection of this oneness: “If this were the role of religion, the only valid religious teachings would be those which teach love, acceptance, and unity with all people.”

Well said. As much as I like the meetings of the spiritual group I attend most Sunday mornings, I cringe inwardly every time I hear a speaker say, “We are so fortunate to be among the chosen few who have been blessed to return to God.” Laurel, entirely appropriately, frequently teases me about this divisive attitude.

Putting on her best Saturday Night Live “Church Lady” voice, she will say to me: “You’re saved, but Satan has doomed me to hell!” “Yes, you’re right,” I’ll reply with tongue firmly in my cheek, “But I’ll try to put in a good word for you when I see God.”

We joke about how almost every religious or spiritual group, including Radha Soami Satsang Beas (Science of the Soul), which I’ve been a longtime member of, considers that its followers, and they alone, are the “chosen people.” If you add up all the supposedly chosen people in the world—Christians, Jews, Muslims, and members of other exclusive sects—the unchosen such as Laurel are in the minority. (I recently wrote about this “all believers are above average” strangeness in “You’re religious, but are you right?”

Here is Laurel’s essay, which she has submitted to our local Salem Monthly alternative publication. As she says at the end of the piece, we’re thinking about forming a Church of the Churchless group here in Salem which would meet in physical reality instead of the blogosphere. If you’re interested in being part of such a group, send us an email.

No Comments
Posted inGod Religions Spiritual practice/meditation

You’re religious, but are you right?

Most religious believers live in their own version of Lake Woebegone. In Garrison Keillor’s mythical locale all the children are above average. Similarly, in these believers’ mental habitation everyone is right about God. This is truly strange. And what is even stranger is that so few people stop to consider its strangeness. Religious Tolerance.org cites a survey of churches and religions that finds 19 major world religions subdivided into 270 large religious groups and many smaller ones. The four largest religions are Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. The fundamental beliefs of each one are incompatible with the other three. Even…
1