Religion and Spirituality
When you have a
guy like Yuval Noah Harari who is well versed in multiple fields and who can
communicate brilliantly, the books he writes are inevitably awesome. Like his
recent book, Home
Deus.
Among the hunter
gatherers, religion, says Harari, was animist in its world view:
“They believed that there was no essential
gap separating humans from other animals… People talked with animals, trees and
stones, as well as fairies, demons and ghosts.”
Then came the
religions of the post-agricultural era, like Christianity, by which time man
was into agriculture and used cows and horses as tools:
“While animists saw humans as just another
kind of animal, the Bible argues that humans are a unique creation… (In a book
full of miracles) The only time an animal initiates a conversation with a human
is when the serpent tempts Eve to eat the forbidden fruit of knowledge.”
Harari thus concludes
that religions reflect the relation between man and nature at the time of foundation of the religion! The rest of nature is
considered irrelevant in the post-agricultural religions, he says:
“The Bible thinks it is perfectly all right
to destroy all animals as punishment for the crimes of Homo Sapiens, as if the
existence of giraffes, pelicans and ladybirds has lost all purpose if humans
misbehave.”
As opposed to the
older religions:
“Other religions, particularly Jainism,
Buddhism and Hinduism, have demonstrated even greater empathy to animals.”
But even they
changed the narrative as their population moved to agriculture and the use of
animals as livestock, finding “ways to justify human superiority and the
exploitation of animals (if not for meat, then for milk and muscle power)”.
In a different
part of the book, Harari tries to define religion. He starts by citing what it
is not: it is not mindless
superstition or belief in supernatural powers or even a belief in gods. Rather,
he says:
“Religion is anything that confers
superhuman legitimacy on human social structures. It legitimizes human norms
and values by arguing that they reflect superhuman laws. Religion asserts that
we humans are subject to a system of moral laws that we did not invent and that
we cannot change.”
By this
definition, not only are Hinduism, Christianity and Judaism religions but so
are Buddhism and Jainism (despite not having gods), and (hold your breath) so
too are Nazism, communism and liberalism!
“Of course, each believes in a different
set of natural laws discovered and revealed by different sears and prophets,
from Buddha and Laozi to Hitler and Lenin.”
Spirituality,
however, is a different thing altogether, says Harari:
“(Spiritual journeys) take people in
mysterious ways towards unknown destinations. The quest usually begins with one
big question, such as who am I? What is the meaning of life? What is good?
Whereas many people just accept the readymade answers by the powers that be,
spiritual seekers and not so easily satisfied. They are determined to follow
the big question wherever it leads, and not just to places you know well or
wish to visit.”
The key difference
from religion?
“Such journeys are fundamentally different
from religions, because religions seek to cement the worldly order whereas
spirituality tries to escape it. Often enough, the most important demand from
spiritual wanderers is to challenge the beliefs and conventions of dominant
religions.”
And so:
“For religions, spirituality is a dangerous
threat.”
Like I said at the
top, this is just one topic in his awesome book. The others are written just as
well, if not even better.
'This is just one topic in Yuval Noah Harari's awesome books' you say. That shows how you enjoyed his arguments and the outlook he projects on religions and spirituality. I am really glad that you are not shy of accepting the distinction between religion and spirituality. That you selected his succinct and reality-depicting remark, “For religions, spirituality is a dangerous threat" is an indicator on how well you received the point regarding this issue. Those who are unwilling to discern the distinction between religion and spirituality are unable to come out of their rigidly set opinion, without checking on facts.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that, like you, the author is also an intellectual wanderer into the analysis of what religion and spirituality could be about. Though I cannot conclude without reading the book in full, from you blog I infer that for him 'enlightenment' is just a point of debate. The point I am making is this: those who debate enlightenment are those who are not Buddhas, the enlightened ones. True spirituality's source can only be the enlightened ones. Of course even others can instinctively sense the implication of that state, hence seek for themselves, plus, induce people to go in that direction too. Yuval Noah Harari is not in that gang either! :-)
On the whole I feel sure the book must be very interesting, thanks to your blog.