Two terms, Spirituality and Religion, deeply connected, but yet leaves behind a very different taste in our mouths.We come across surveys that tell us more and more people, at least in the urban areas, feel more and more comfortable identifying themselves as "spiritual" than as "religious".
What is the essential disconnect between being spiritual and being religious?What is the basis of this dichotomy? Which practices, which beliefs, which ideas differentiate one from the other? Is there anyway we can be spiritual and religious at the same time?
These are my random thoughts on these two terms, though viscerally joined, yet almost separated at birth.
What is common between Religion and Spirituality?
Belief is the basis of all religions; just as spirituality cannot do away with faith.
Hope is an essential nature of the religious; just as someone spiritual cannot but be an optimist.
A sense of sacredness, auspiciousness is common to both religion and spirituality.
Both makes its adherent aware of his/her being part of something bigger than themselves.
And both , in their own ways, provide a meaning to their lives.
And how are they different?
Religion is a shared identity; while spirituality is a deeply personal exploration.
Religion is mostly inherited; while spirituality is essentially an individual construct.
Religion needs a temple, a church or a mosque; while spirituality is nourished by silence and blossoms in nature.
Religion seeks for guidance without; while spirituality seeks for light within.
Religion needs an organization,a structure; while spirituality needs aloneness, freedom.
Religion satisfies the primal urge of belonging and communality; while spirituality tries to quench the eternal thirst for knowledge and meaning.
Religion demands compliance, obedience and loyalty; while spirituality urges keenness, passion and courage.
Religion needs god(s), scriptures, commandments; while spirituality seeks experience, transcendence, an awakened conscience.
Religion provides security, certainty; while spirituality demands a spirit of probing and inquiry.
Religion offers answers to questions; while spirituality seeks questions to answers.
Religion tells you about your destination; while spirituality urges you to take the journey.
Just as one cannot take away "ritual" from "spiritual", Religion not resulting in Realization is as good as being worthless.
A great master once quipped "It is all right to be born in a religion, but not to die in one". What did he mean?
While religion provides us the initial guidance, sets us on the path of self-discovery, gives us encouragement and direction, protects us from our baser instincts, instills in us a sense of right and wrong, makes us aware of a higher purpose - eventually it should lead us to an inner journey of seeking, encourage in us a deep yearning for that transcendental experience that all religions talk about, put us on a personal exploration shorn off all prejudice, narrowness and division. An unripe fruit is bitter and unwholesome; similarly religion which has not ripened into spirituality, more often than not is sullied with the bitter taste of a misplaced sense of ego. "My path is the BEST path" if not, "My Path is the ONLY path"! And this pernicious if subtle ego, manifests into a self-righteous prudishness at its best, and a dogmatic parochialism, narrowness and bigotry at its worst.
We are all born with the seed of self-inquiry sown into our hearts. Religion, which was meant to provide the initial protection to the sprouting seed of spirituality, most of the time ends up in stunting if not stifling the blossoming of the sprout. We should be ever more vigilant to see that this seed with all its magnificent potentiality, grows up into a mighty tree, drawing its sustenance from deep within, and providing coolness and refuge to our wary spirit.
Has not all the great masters and founders of religions, done exactly that?
1 comment:
Though the core meaning of spirituality is the personal exploration through transcendental experience which shorn off all prejudice and narrowness, which any evolved and philanthropic mind can realize undoubtedly, spirituality limits itself by the boundaries of religion as its origin lies there. Surely spirituality in itself so independent and freedom that the concept of boundary looks ridiculous here. But has not it happened from time immemorial? How?
The transcendental supreme spiritual experience need a guidance and intellectual concept or ideology or rather could be said as understanding, which inevitably carries a dogma or doctrine along with it…based on which the nature of transcendental experience or rather the expression of the experience could be of different level, though apparently…viz advaita, bishistadvaita or dvaita.
Though a philanthropic mind wants to break all possible limitation and tries to achieve the highest possible sense of infinite contentment, the same resolution could be varied from individual to individual based on emotional demand and understanding. Perhaps that is the reason that even great people like Ramanuja after enlightenment seemed little orthodox to establish the doctrine of bishstadvaita, or Chaitanya to establish his doctrine of dvaita and Buddha, mahavira or sankara their own dogma following their spiritual experience.
Ordinary aspirant cannot question any of their experience and hence must have to seek the best possible understanding of his Self through some or all of the doctrines that suits his psychological status.And whenever he tries to attain a sort of intellectual understanding which can explore him to liberate from all limitations, he must follow a path or guru or scripture of particular tradition or doctrine. And by following a doctrine the spiritual aspirant must identify himself with a religion of Hinduism, Islam Jainism, and Buddhism etc.
Though human heart undoubtedly realizes that whatever dogma he follows, at last that is to lead him to the sense of oneness, while in the journey of establishing a proper understanding, the mind of aspirant travels in the vicious circle of dogma, religion and the true independent spirituality which is beyond all philosophy.
Is not the only way to reach the absolute freedom is to throw all dogma and religions and thereby to realize the absolute? Though one cannot do this without understanding and acceptance of core essence of all these religions, according to his own intellectual satisfaction by contemplating on these philosophies which constitute the message of a religion.
So might be religions are not only the initial fruit which must be ripened to attain spirituality, religion is a fruit which must be torn off at last to get the spirituality. Denial of all philosophy and making ones understanding as his realization becomes the path at last. Then religion becomes the label “ use and crush”. A thorn of religion might be used to remove another thorn of misunderstanding or nonunderstanding, and at last both the thorns must be thrown away…..as revealed by Ramakrishna Paramhansa
Post a Comment