I spend a good bit of time castigating organized religion, particularly Christianity. I believe that the institutional basis of religion is more about earthly power, control and money than anything else. To be certain, the religious leaders always clothe their earthly desires in supernatural and divine garb, but if one only scratches the bare surface, it's really easy to see what they are truly after.
With my non-religious stance, it might appear that I think the Torah, Christian Bible, Koran, Bhagavad Gita, and all other sacred texts are nothing more than big piles of hooey. Actually, that's not the case at all. I believe that most religious and philosophical works contain bits of wisdom. Each seeks to address the Grand Mystery of life and to try to discern clues as to how we humans should comport ourselves in order to find meaning and peace of mind.
The problem with these texts is how later generations treat them. Far too often, people skirt by the wisdom contained within to set their ruminations in cement -- which creates dogma. The living words become dead words and the living thought becomes dead thought. People come to live their contemporary lives through the eyes and ears of people long dead.
For philosophical Taoists, the great works of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu are treated far differently. We don't pretend that they were divinely-inspired. We don't pretend that they are the words of Tao itself. These works were written by people who struggled with trying to comprehend the very same incomprehensible aspects of life that you and I do.
For us, the ancient Taoist texts are nothing more than springboards. They highlight, underscore and discuss what it means to be human in this vast cosmos of existence. While these works are cherished because they pull few punches, they push us to experience life on our own terms and to write our own words.
Put another way, they do not offer themselves up as the final word on anything.
If people of religious faith did not take their holy books as THE final and definitive word, then these texts could serve the same function -- be a springboard -- as the Tao Te Ching and Zhuangzi.
With my non-religious stance, it might appear that I think the Torah, Christian Bible, Koran, Bhagavad Gita, and all other sacred texts are nothing more than big piles of hooey. Actually, that's not the case at all. I believe that most religious and philosophical works contain bits of wisdom. Each seeks to address the Grand Mystery of life and to try to discern clues as to how we humans should comport ourselves in order to find meaning and peace of mind.
The problem with these texts is how later generations treat them. Far too often, people skirt by the wisdom contained within to set their ruminations in cement -- which creates dogma. The living words become dead words and the living thought becomes dead thought. People come to live their contemporary lives through the eyes and ears of people long dead.
For philosophical Taoists, the great works of Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu are treated far differently. We don't pretend that they were divinely-inspired. We don't pretend that they are the words of Tao itself. These works were written by people who struggled with trying to comprehend the very same incomprehensible aspects of life that you and I do.
For us, the ancient Taoist texts are nothing more than springboards. They highlight, underscore and discuss what it means to be human in this vast cosmos of existence. While these works are cherished because they pull few punches, they push us to experience life on our own terms and to write our own words.
Put another way, they do not offer themselves up as the final word on anything.
If people of religious faith did not take their holy books as THE final and definitive word, then these texts could serve the same function -- be a springboard -- as the Tao Te Ching and Zhuangzi.
i agree. taken within its cultural framework, the bible and other religious texts show great insight and even revolutionary ideas. the danger lies in idealizing any one culture or worldview, because it limits your thinking and idealizes the bad as well as the good. no culture or society has all the answers, and so the religions birthed from such cultures inherently carries their negative as well as positive attributes. that's why the "divine inspiration" argument is so dangerous! because it passes off the flaws as law.
ReplyDelete