A world without religion

Karl Marx said:

"Religious suffering is at one and the same time the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is therefore in embryo the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo."

a post on X's blog and some comments there got me thinking about religion. and i found that bit that Marx said about religion. and i realised that his insight on that matter was incredibly incisive.

Man created God to explain what he cannot, to give strength when his own strength fails, to give hope when the situation seems desperate, to right greivances which otherwise would forever remain unjust, to assuage an otherwise unbearable pain. it is because of our own innate weakness that we create a supernatural being which is everything that Man wants to be but is not, a perfection which we can aspire to, look towards for some form of guidance and assistance.

but if there comes a day when Man no longer needs the crutch of religion to stand on his own, having the strength of willpower, fortitude of character, empowered to create a glorious present and astounding future for himself, then God would be obsolete.

however, for such a day to be, Man would need to evolve, but not just in our physical attributes, but in our mindsets, not just Man as an individual, but human civilisation, not just Man the being, but also Man the idea. all have to evolve, to become that higher being, to become, in our own rights, God.

is that not possible? is that irreverant? that one day we might become equal with God?

no. i don't think it is irreverant nor impossible. as early as 2500 years ago, Guatama Siddharta expounded such a philosophy. that we all have the potential to be enlightened beings, surpassing even the Gods we worship. the path to this enlightenment is long and treacherous, with many distractions and temptations, but it can be done. and Siddharta offered some advice, what he would call expedient means. but he did not say that those were the only path to reach the state of becoming an enlightened being. different people take different paths. but regardless of the path they take, they can become that enlightened being.

is this an arrogant way of thinking?

on the contrary, i think it is liberating, humbling. because everyone of us posses that potential to be such an enlightened being that we are all worthy of respect, that we should thus respect one another, treating one another as equals, working together, helping one another become that enlightened being and hence achieving a complete evolution of humanity.

it is a self-centred practice. in the sense that the change has to start with the self. but not end with the self. as Goethe said, "why have i sought my path with fervent care, if not in hope to bring my brothers there." but this hope is not out of a desire for self-aggrandizement, but purely because one wants to share, to assist, because that is the right thing to do.

isn't this another religion?

yes and no. it is a lifestyle. an attitude. a mindset. it only becomes a religion when you throw in the rituals. but again, because at this stage, humanity, Man is too weak that we might need the rituals as a crutch while we gradually develop to that stage (a la training wheels on a bike). however, these rituals are not the end in themselves, but merely an expedient means. the end stage is to lead a life, have an attitude, a mindset of an enlightened being.

so do we need religion?

i supose so. for now at least. but only as an expedient mean to the stage when Man becomes enlightened, when Man becomes (and perhaps even surpasses) the God that we have invented.