Exploring Religions

January 7, 2006

We would wish to observe that among many young souls, there is a tendency not only to embrace religion, but to enforce it upon others whether or not it is appropriate for the fragment, the evolution, or culture in question. We have said before but we will reiterate, enforced religion is non-religion, and just as it is impossible to dictate how another will experience the "ineffable" so it often tends to create exactly the opposite circumstance that the promulgators believe they are promoting. In other words, by imposing a religion upon a fragment, it is oftentimes a guarantee that the fragment will not in fact be able to move beyond the strictures of the outward form and thus never achieve the inward form of self-intimacy which is, of course, the goal of all "spiritual" experiences.

It might not be amiss, should you choose to do so, to approach religious "promises" as essentially a public relations effort to bring about united opinions rather than any genuine self intimacy, and therefore to function as a "pressure group". As should be apparent, for most fragments, dogma is a means of cultural intimidation, not "spiritual" access, and so long as dogma is uppermost in "the scheme of things" it is unlikely that those subscribing to the dogma will be in any position to realize anything more than cultural behavioral endorsement.

Generally we would think that fragments exploring the nature and complexities of any religion might be well advised to regard it as a cultural artifact rather than a "spiritual springboard". By creating a formulaic approach to self-intimacy most religions, once their primary teacher has died, are quick to adapt the teaching to preexisting socio-cultural norms, and to remove all traces of "dangerous" or "contrary" teachings that might in fact supersede the cultural paradigms that the dogma can enforce, which is why of course the teachings inherent in all major religions echo the expectations and views of the culture from which they sprang. We would wish to point out that the decisions made by the Buddha were appropriate to him and his life task, and although in many ways exemplary, they are not and were never intended to be a formula of behavior for anyone other than the prince Siddhartha. By seeking to emulate the behavior of a teacher, many souls assume that the spiritual awareness will somehow "rub off" on them, and although occasionally this can bring about a greater sense of self-realization, for the most part it creates little more than smug self-congratulations, which is true of all religions where the teacher is dead. Because of this limiting range of discovery, we would think that many fragments might wish to choose the comparative approach, rather than the monolithic one. In other words, to examine and contrast the statements of the validated higher teachings of the transcendental souls and infinite souls through their human manifestation as a means of arriving at the underlying commonality with a minimum amount of cultural overlay. This will not necessarily increase spiritual awareness, or even bring about opportunities for self-intimacy, but it can lessen the cultural expectations grafted on to valid teaching and help the individual exploring fragment to be able to discern what the basic conveyance of the teachings can be.

We think it somewhat ironic, that those monotheistic systems with legalistic structures such as but not limited to Judaism, Christianity and Islam, should have sprung from various sources many of which were primarily political, but invested with religiosity as a means of perpetuation to the degree that almost all writings political, social, military or religious, should end up "lumped together" in such a way that any degree of questioning presupposes automatically a failure on the part of the questioner, and only endorsing those points of view supporting "the cause" are seen in any of these three faiths as well as four others as a legitimate means of spiritual expression. We have outlined the perils of monotheism but we would wish to enlarge upon some of the ramifications inherent in these perceptions; the single standard approach to all manner of spiritual practices tends to diminish the ability of those who adhere to the faith to find their own accesses to spiritual awareness, not that spiritual awareness itself is "necessary" for there is no way that any ensouled fragment can eschew or disengage from spiritual perceptions. As we have said many times, the work of the physical plane, is the physical plane, and therefore realizing the physical capacity for religious perception is often accepted instead of the physical capacity for spiritual validation and self-intimacy. Accepting the standards of a dogma as legitimate for self-intimacy is not unlike accepting the rules of algebra as a way in which to assess the "virtues" of a prize bull. The question of applicability particularly regarding dogmatic expectations can be perhaps the intrusive element in a formulaic approach to spiritual validation. Very rarely, does spiritual validation come with prayers incense and ritual for that usual promotes a group high. Chanting of course can distract chief features and allow certain access to essence for those experienced in the technique, but we assure you such talents are rare and for all those who have claimed to benefit from such exercises, the actual amount of self intimacy occurred during them is less than 5%. Of course if you enjoy chanting and ritual there is no reason not to pursue it, unless of course you are seeking self-intimacy. We have in the past but we will again point out that consultation with the oracle of the rubber ducky can be spiritually efficacious in that it has few expectations and no ritual to distort it's "meaning". By applying oneself to the pursuance of that oracle, the fragment may indeed clear the way to reach the actuality of self-intimacy with as little chief feature interference as is likely to occur. The more the fragment clings to dogma the more the chief features distort and block the insights that would otherwise be accessible. For many using such devises as Tibetan singing bowls can serve in place of chanting, but again the greatest access occurs when there is a lack of dogma in the employment of these devices.

As is probably apparent, increasingly dogmatic religion creates its own kind of extinguishing fractal and the algorithm that is inherent in evolving religion tends to confine itself to rapidly extinguishing characteristics which bring about fewer and fewer aspects of the religion being more and more valid for fewer and fewer people, which is of course the "formula" [hahahha] for fundamentalistic [sic] approaches to dogma and "scripture". Just as all social forms have fractal components in their structure, so do all religions that have passed into literature and by becoming increasingly aware of more and more proscribed interpretations and applications, fragments may avail themselves of an understanding of this particular fractal-like structure. Those who are able to discern the algorithm of the societal aspects of religion can gain much in their understanding of social evolution through an assessment of the algorithmic phases that are present in religions in which the teachers are no longer present to teach.