Ken Wilber makes the point that there is a difference between levels of awareness where you take belief as something that is true and where you take belief as if it were true. It seems like a subtle difference, but the outcome is very different.
If we believe that a given story tells an absolute truth upon which every man's salvation depends, then it makes sense that power and resources should be structured around that belief. It makes sense that it should be spread, even if by bloodshed, because the time of the non-believer's death is irrelevant when damnation is endles, and the time of a believer's death is irrelevant because salvation is eternal. And where there is conflict in the interpretation of the story it just gets worse...
But if we live as though the story were true, we don't need to derive a prescription from it. We can instead look at the symbols and patterns it provides that lead us to a joyful and peaceful existence and live according to that. And we can ignore what doesn't. We realize that it is the principles of the story that matter, not the particulars.
But religion serves an important purpose for a lot of people. We can't castigate the whole believing populace because of those who have misused it as an excuse for inexcusable behavior. The only enlightenment we can experience is the enlightenment of now; and the enlightenment of one does not judge the enlightenment of another.
|