Jagat

Reposting from a comment on this blog .  =========== Atheists believe that much of the problem with humanity lies in religion. They have many good reasons for so doing, as one can read in the intelligent critiques made by Chenna Keshavan in the discussion on the above thread. But even though religion is often seen as a culprit, I would like to say that it is not religion per se, but immature religion, that is the source of the problem. There is no reason to believe that mature individuals with a rational and scientific understanding of the world will still not be persuaded of things like God and the soul when they reach the limits of their rational outlook. The answer lies in "mature" religion. Even Krishna in the Gita mentions four kinds of people who take up religious life--the suffering, the desirer of benefits, the curiosity seeker and the knowledgeable. Moreover, he distinguishes between knowledge and other kinds of religious activities in terms of  sattva, ...

I recently posted a review of Universalist Radha-Krishnaism , which led to personal discussions with the author and others. Without divulging the content of those discussions, I would like to share some thoughts. It seems to me that one of the purposes of religion is community creation. For many sociologists and anthropologists, of course, that is the primary purpose of religion. It has now become the habit of those who are individualists to say they seek “spirituality” and make a strong distinction between the social forms of religiosity and the personal. I believe this is a false dichotomy, as society is made up of individuals, and a society of strong individuals is a strong society. But all societies need commonalities, otherwise there is no community. We should perhaps distinguish between society, with which an individual may have only tenuous identification, and community, where such identifications are much stronger. Society is larger, community more intimate. One finds on...

From a friend: I am feeling a bit on the agnostic side these days. I love the idea of God and his grace and all that, but I feel as if, despite the lovely memories, the warm comfort of a life of faith, I must finally make it official that Santa Claus really does not exist. There is no harm in continuing celebrating Christmas, and even cheerfully hanging the stocking over the fireplace, but the truth is that I now know that the gift placed under my tree does not come from an immortal father ridding a sleigh in the sky. It comes from my wishing him to be. All that sense of self and confidence in my life has come from this sense of him being there at all times. But he isn't there without my hard work. And I am tired. I don't want to make up God, I want him to be. Why, for a change, can't I be surprised? Why must I work so hard, always, to come up with a mere match to my tired, narrow self needs? I am really sorry that you are having these particular doubts. I will admit that i...

In view of the discussions in this blog, I though the article “Bishop’s take on sexuality ignites debate” (Michael Valpy, Globe and Mail , March 9, 2007) interesting. I have excerpted liberally from that article here. The Anglican Church is currently in the middle of a crisis that threatens schism. The issue is that of sexuality, with liberal North American churches taking a progressive stand on homosexual marriage and other hot button issues, while the numerically superior and more vibrant, at least in terms of growth, third-world churches taking conservative positions and resisting what appears to them as the first-world churches’ arrogance. One of the more vociferous spokesmen of the liberal position is Bishom Michael Ingham of New Westminster in British Columbia. Last week, at a church conference in Ottawa, he said that the church’s opposition to birth control, abortion, masturbation and homosexuality is morally groundless because its traditional teaching that sex is reserved for p...