There was recent debate in the WSJ between Science and Religion between Richard Dawkins and Karen Armstrong. Richard Dawkins is a pioneering thinker and writer. An evolutionary biologist. A very penetrating and entertaining writer as well. Karen Armstrong is an equally penetrating and strong voice on the side of religion; not dogmatic mind you.
We are all familiar in Science vs Religion; Man vs God; Evolution vs Creation debates. To some degree, given where we are in our life-stage, we have probably arrived at our own tentative stances.
However, these two essays from the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal are very well written. Two great examples of i) people knowing what they are talking about ii) writing persuasively iii) writing intelligibly and entertainingly and iv) engaging in respectful and honest debate.
http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052970203440104574405030643556324.html
After reviewing the above, and after many conversations with friends and family, I feel the following could be posited on this topic:
Thought #1: Spirituality and Religion may overlap but are not the same.
It occurs to me that a commonsense notion is to consider both to be the same. Or perhaps as two concentric circles, with Spirituality in the core and religion sorrounding it. i.e to assert that Spirituality is the foundation of Religion.
Perhaps instead one could suggest that it is more a venn diagram. i.e. Spirituality is one circle. Religion is another circle and the two (happen to) overlap.
Thought #2: Other disciplines and Spirituality may overlap as well.
I could be an artist and be spiritual, and not have performed a single religious ritual.. In other words Art and Spirituality can be a venn diagram as well.
If you read Spinoza, the God of Spinoza is unlike the God one imagines - it is more around the topic of harmony than anything else.
Thought #3: Religion is anchored more by culture/region and human affairs than is spirituality
To manage a church or a temple involves administrative affairs (recruiting priests, training priests, disciplining priests, paying priests etc).
Spirituality appears to be free of any anchor.
One can be Jewish culturally for example, but not religious - as I speculate Einstein was. (He was more in the Spinoza school of thought).
Thought #4: While all jugal bandis* can be interesting a jugal bandi that includes spirituality might be truly worthy.
Where I am going with this last statement, is that indeed any set of Jugal Bandi's can be Religion and another topic.
But by discussing the ever popular twin topics of Religion and Spirituality, we have opened the door to the notion that these are two separate schemas as it were.
And that we can indeed separate the two and pursue new jugal bandis without religion (or science!) that still pursue the central questions of life and existence.
(* Jugal Bandi is a performance in Indian classical music that features a duet of two solo musicians. The word jugalbandi means, literally, "entwined twins." It can be either vocal or instrumental)
1 comment:
I am fascinated by the Jugalbandi. But I do have reservations about the relationship between religion and spirituality.
I feel that spirituality comes from within and religion is imposed. I am not of the opinion that religion is bad or to be condemned. I am only saying that there is a genuine risk that religion can be hijacked by selfish people to achieve control over others.
So, regarding your metaphor of the Jugalbanhi, I feel that the circles of spirituality and religion at best touch each other but not intersect.
As for science, it does not seek to have any relation with either of the above. It seeks its own course. But many great scientists
did (towards the end ) came to the conclusion that there is a convergence between science and spirituality ( not religion). They have realized hat no matter what name we give to "God", it is ultimately, that illusive truth which is slightly beyond the comprehension of us (at
least for now).
We may go round and round it with rituals, equations, theories, it is not possible to pin it down to a Newtonian level of understanding. It is like a mirage. It appears to be almost reachable. But when you really go there , it goes still farther.
But the quest for it always has been, always is and always will be exciting and rewarding.
Post a Comment