Religion... and religion...

I've often posted about the nature of religion and spirituality. It seems to be a very subjective topic with everyone ready to jump in with their ideas.

We all have our notions of these terms based on our experiences and inherent paradigms, but to make any sense out of it all so that we can communicate successfully and actually be on the same page, we need to find common ground.

The most popular comment is something to the effect of "I'm spiritual but not religious!".

But my point of contention is the definition of  "religion" and "spiritual".

Unrelated pic - just because

Now I'm not saying I have the ultimate definitions, but I've dug around extensively at the root meanings, the cultural interpretations and psychological inferences (sounds impressive!) and come to what I consider a good baseline for the terminology.

Spirituality is the innate part of every human, that longs for purpose, meaning and eternity.
It's the part of us that looks at the stars and the seas and forests and is left speechless in awe.
It's our yearning for meaning to this short, temporal existence. It fires our hearts with imagination and helps us understand love and life. It doesn't have any set form or dogma, it's simply a part of our existence.

When we talk about being spiritual, what are we actually saying? Most of us would agree on the above statements, give or take. But we also add our own belief systems into the mix, creating a confusing definition that others easily misinterpret.

Religion however, is the application of theories supported by subjective experiences, doctrines (formalised theologies and beliefs systems) and rituals that help us make sense of our innate spirituality. (Wikipedea: Religion is any cultural system of designated behaviors and practices, world views, texts, sanctified places, ethics, or organizations, that relate humanity to the supernatural or transcendental. Religions relate humanity to what anthropologist Clifford Geertz has referred to as a cosmic "order of existence".[1] However, there is no scholarly consensus over what precisely constitutes a religion)

Using this definition, we can see that all the major "religions" clearly fit the definitions. But millions of people explore "alternative", "new age" or what they call pure spirituality without realising that they are also embracing religion.

I recently engaged in a tense discussion with a friend about things like chakras, reiki, and similar forms of "spiritual" practices. Although our biggest problem was to do with definitions, it did cause me to stop and think about the whole issue again.

Whatever methods we use to interpret and apply our innate sense of spirituality is basically a religion! We may embrace various forms of "new age" teachings or traditional teachings from indigenous or ancient cultures - a whole range of practices we consider as spiritual but not religious. But in fat, the moment we apply some form of methodology, interpretation and application of a spiritual concept, we have adopted a religion.

This in itself is fine! We have to, so that we can apply the principles in a constructive way. It's not "bad" to practice religion in any form because it's the only way we can live by our beliefs.

But here's where the rubber hits the road...

• Do you think your religious applications of spiritual concepts are "the truth"? 
• Do you proclaim you have the real deal and other people need to be enlightened to the reality of your beliefs? 
• What are the "fruits" of your beliefs (that you apply as a religion to your life)?
• Have you refined your beliefs into a form of religion that has become dogma? (a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true)

So many people claim they have rejected religion to discover "true" spirituality, free of the dogma and oppression of religious fundamentalism. but they are unaware that they have simply shifted from one form of religion to another - that they have accepted another dogma with just as much passion as they claim to have rejected. 

What we fail to see is that any form of religion and dogma is entirely subjective - there is no empirical evidence for any spiritual beliefs or the applications of those beliefs through a religious structure.

Whatever we embrace is, by it's very nature, subjective and cannot be defined by dogma. Whatever we believe, we have two primary considerations - do we regard it as dogma, and what is the fruit of that belief?

If our "religious"  belief and expression is in any way exclusive, creates an "us and them" mentality, denies unconditional love to all humanity, then we have failed at the most fundamental level. We must examine our beliefs and be prepared to let go of all our assumptions.

It's OK to be wrong.

It's OK to lose unshakeable beliefs.

It's OK to have an existential crisis.

It's OK to simply "be".

Live loved - because that is all that matters!