I generally have a problem with
organised religion as prefer not having to outsource too much of my
thinking to someone else and being a triple leo I don't like the idea of being told what to do. It is not as if I hate any religion. I actually find them fascinating, it is just that settling on one Organised one gives me a headache. All religions as having an
element of truth in them, but they also contain huge amounts of bullshit which appears to come from the fact that their original founding premise was a little screwed.
I was watching a BBC programme about
religion and it touched on several of the points I find weak about
the whole experience. Religions seem to identify problems which we may
not have and offer solutions that we don't actually need.
The Christian problem "solved by Christ. But sin requires you to believe in it even more than you believe in Christ, |
For example, Christianity creates the
problem that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
This sin can be removed by a faith in Jesus Christ who died so you
can be forgiven. But surely the real answer to this is not to think
“how can I escape from this terrible sin problem?” but rather to
say that the whole concept is rather silly. It requires me to first
believe in a God that punishes me for the actions of a mythical
ancestor and then states that I need to be forgiven. If someone
tries to lock me away because the British did bad things in India, I
would fight the unjust nature of the thing. I would not buy into a
system that would allow me to be forgiven for the blame.
The Wheel of Birth and Death only keeps rolling when you see it as a problem in the first place. |
Hindu and Buddhism strikes a similar
problem. Those faiths say we are trapped in a wheel of birth and
death and must re-incarnate until we become enough like god. The
cure is to remove all those desires and things that make us human so
that we can transcend the wheel. But a much simpler approach is
possible. Since the problem has been created by the idea that the
wheel of birth and death exists, it is better not to believe in it at
all. Who was it that came up with a silly idea in the first
place... er the Hindus who invented a religion to over come something
that might not exist. Buddha simply came up with another way to
escape that wheel.
Judaism was created on the premise that
a particular god had chosen one tribe of nomads and was going to look
after them and give them a promised land. All they had to do was lop
their foreskins off and obey some rules.
The only problem was that the God had
decided that this Promised Land happened to be on a part of the world
which was the main road for almost every blood-thirsty empire that
the world created. Egyptians, Hittites, Persians, Babylonians,
Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, and Mongols, Christians all have
past through the area and left their boot marks firmly on Jewish
heads. Not only did the Jewish god seemed to forget to protect his
people he claimed it was a punishment. As a result, Jewish
believers who have piously followed the original premise have spend
several thousand years being kicked around the world. When they get
their Promised Land back they have placed their faith in arms and
nukes which sort of defeats the purpose.
Obey or die and you will get to live in the arse end of the world where everyone will want to kill you. |
It would have better off if they said
actually this Promised land is not that great and if you are not
going to protect us we will go to another God. They should have
known better as the first act of their new God, after giving them the
law was to slaughter huge numbers of them who happened to be
worshipping Apis and his next few acts involved making them walk
around the desert in circles for forty years.
These problems are those which
monothestic religions face. This was a problem with the Greco-roman
state religions too. They were based on the fact that if you did not
respect the Gods then they would make life unpleasant for you. It
was also possible that if you did them a few favours they might look
after you. This seems logical, but then when you release that there
were a lot of Gods it was difficult to find out which one you have
pissed off. It was easier to belong to a different religion where
that God was not recognised so you couldn't hack one off.
My point is that most of the organised
religions were founded to solve problems that they themselves
created. They all, to some measure, reflect the fears of the society
at the time they were created and as we say in the Golden Dawn “fear
is failure.” This fear was one of the reasons why Christianity
defeated the more heady mystery cults and Neo-Platonism. Ordinary
people found them too hard and they were desperate for something
simple that would provide them with some security.
This is why modern occultists need to
find their own answers to religious questions and why it is
impossible to judge another person's solutions. It is also why you
cannot spit hate at another person's religion and use it as a
definition of “other.” Anne Davies once said that a good test of
whether someone was an adept or not was how much bile they spit at
another's race. This was good counsel only for the perfect as Anne
had a problem with homosexuality and believed that gay people were
broken and could not become adepts until they were healed!
But Davies' point is correct. You cannot
experience state of unity that an adept is supposed to have and claim
that another human else must be separate from that. Nor can you
claim that your race or religion is superior to another because they
are all an expression of the One Thing.
More negatively they are all pretty
silly when contrasted with the reality of that which is ultimately
unknowable. How you approach that unknowing is your spiritual path. Practically it does not require you to sign up to any religion ancient or modern. It just requires you to form your own ideas and relationship with the One Thing.