A Religion That Can Change

Perhaps the greatest failure of religion up until now has been its inability to change. Religion is almost by definition dogmatic and so resists change. So, while culture and society change, religion is unable to adapt with it, or if it does, it is slow and stubborn. Alternatively, different denominations splinter off (as with the Anglican church) or, new religions are created as a progression from the existing tradition (Bahaism, Shikism, Buddhism, Christianiy, Islam, Rastafarianism, Mormonism). A third possibility is that entirely new religions are created (Scientology).

This historical inability for religion to adapt has given rise to a common perception that this is "just the way religion works". But I don't think that has to be the case--and I would like to challenge the idea. After all, why is it that other disciplines like science are inclusive, but religion is not? Why is it that physicists are not factionalized, and unwilling to work together, but rabbis, priests and mullahs are?

The hard core athiest might jump to the conclusion: "because there is no substance to religion". I disagree. I think there is a pretty clear purpose for religion as there is a clear purpose for physics. The purpose of physics is to study the movement of matter and energy through spacetime. The purpose of religion is to answer those pressing existential questions that we all have at one time or another in our lives: What is the nature of self? What is my purpose? How can I be happy? What happens when I die? and What does it all mean, anyway? Since we can pretty clearly identify the questions that religion addresses, then we can give it creedence as a legitimate discipline, like science.

If there are answers to these questions, an I expect that there are, then there is no reason why religion cannot be run a little bit more like physics--with it students and practicioners working together, to further the discipline, and their personal understanding of it, instead of arguing over conflicting dogma. In physics, scientists don't argue about things for a while, but usually after a century or so, in the worst case, they come to some sort of accord. If there are universal truths, then those truths necessarily lie outside of the domain of this or that particular religion--they do not "belong" to any relgion--they are the things that religion strives toward. Can you imagine a dozen different national groups of scientists, all having arrived at some half-truth about the nature of black holes refusing to co-operate towards findig some greater understanding of the annomalies, because they are too afraid of being disproven? No! Scientists work inclusively, and so should spiratualists.

The biggest stumbling block that prevents this sort of co-operation is the "insubstantiality" of spiritual pursuits. Just the realm of pshysics is that which is solid, that which has weight, color and shape--that which can be measured, the realm of spirituality is the realm of the insubstantial: the ostensibly weightless, colorless, unmeasurable. It is the realm of the experiencial. It is at once contains the realm of science, and lies outside of it. There is no hard evidence in the same way there is hard evidence for science. Science requires judgement, but spirtual enlightenment requires an absence of judgement. To understand the nature of self, one must strip away as much as possible and see what is left. Science requires stuff to play with, measure and analyze, and as a result, it's much easier to provide evidence of this or that scientific theory. Since spirituality is experiencial, you can't just show someone a diagram in a textbook, and expect them to know what the hell you are talking about (although good art can sometimes fill this function).

So, spirtuality is slippery, but I think we can still package it in some useful way, and so call it a religion. But for that religion to be credible, and for it to continue to be useful (and culturally relevant) as the decades and centuries turn, it must be able to change and adapt like science, art, mathematics, or any other "credible" discipline.