Religion As A State Of Mind

"Our religion is an attitude of mind, not a dogma" said Ohiyesa (Charles Alexander Eastman) a member of the Sioux nation born in Minnesota in 1858.

Having rejected religion because of its dogma at the age of 8, I've lived most of my life professing agnosticism or atheism. Yet an 'attitude of mind' similar to what Ohiyesa described as religion of the Native American seems close to what I've discovered through my own inward investigation of mind as an adult. I now see that religion serves a valuable role, if it can be redefined as an attitude of mind and not by dogma or rigid beliefs.

Religion - defined this way - is a means of connecting or relating to what the Sioux called the "Great Mystery". I can think of the Great Mystery as that which is Unknown. Using science, we chip away at the unknown using 3rd person investigation but a vast - and likely infinite unknown always looms beyond the border of such discovery. A first person experience of the magnitude of this unknown may arise through experiences of transcending oneself or sensing something larger than oneself, whether that something is the evolutionary process, Nature, or a personal God. It is that intuitive awareness of the unknown that religion may be used to understand, experience, or connect.

Organized religions, however, often lose touch with that purpose, getting caught up in the doctrine or beliefs surrounding it. Alan Watts distinguishes the ideas of 'belief' and 'faith' - with faith closely resembling the Ohiyesa definition of religion. He wrote, "The believer will open his mind to the truth on the condition that it fits in with his preconceived ideas and wishes. Faith on the other hand is an unreserved opening of the mind to the truth whatever it may turn out to be....Belief clings, but faith lets go" (The Wisdom of Insecurity, 1951). While religions may be designed as a vehicle for faith, often 'beliefs' take precedence for their members and leaders.

James Carse illustrates the difference between belief and faith in his book, "The religious case against belief" (2008). He argues that knowledge always has, as its complement, ignorance (for we don't know what we don't know) and religion provides a method of experiencing the vastness of the unknown or this ignorance (what Carse calls 'higher ignorance'). When a dogma or belief system is fixed as the explanation for this unknown, there is a closing off, a blocking off of experimentation to discover or relate to it. It is the dogma or belief within religions that limits the function or capacity of religion itself (note 'belief systems' can narrow the mind in secular settings as well).

The Sioux describe their religion as an attitude of mind - an attitude that arises and changes through experimentation and investigation requiring solitude, silence and time in Nature. Nurturing this open and curious attitude of mind arises from these and other things like:

• living with simplicity
• poverty (the letting go of attachment to material things)
• appreciation for the beauty of Nature
• prayer (daily recognition of the Unknown in connection to food, water, or Nature)
• and seeing the extraordinary in ordinary things.

Perhaps it is time to investigate the function of our individual religions and to strip off the dogmas and beliefs that narrow the mind. As we increase our awareness of the diversity of dogmas or beliefs, we can better understand their 'man-made' nature and realize the core process that religion is meant to enhance - what the Sioux called 'an attitude of mind'.

 

Comments

[GodYesOrNo]

How many of you really & truly believe in God?
How many of you subscribe to some sort of religion?
Can you believe in God & not the religions?
Were you born into your religion?
GodYesOrNo.com

[willowranch]

Very well stated. The experience of a sacredness beyond oneself in nature without dogma attached is a state of mind and a basis for a way of life.

[seawolf77]

You are just getting older. You are having second thoughts the same reason the French go to church : to be on the safe side.

[amamomofsons]

I meant to compliment you on the understanding of separating religion from faith and spirituality. Well done.

[khanti]

To believe or not to believe in something we have not seen before? Better to keep in view(kiv) of things. Even if god appears in front of you and say he is god how do you know if he is not the devil in disguise? You have not seen god before so what reference do you have? Although people have not seen the devil before but they attribute a lot of things to him.
So I have traveled alot, moved around alot and have seen strange things. Many people would lump these experinces as seeing ghost but I see them in differrent forms so I would call them beings. Better kiv those experiences then let them disturb the tranquilty of my mind. Seen or unseen, gods or ghosts I extend my loving kindness to them.

[tonedef]

It's always nice to read a thoughtful discussion on religion, and not immediately go toward modern society's typical reactionary or politically correct extremes regarding the subject. Ultimately, spirituality is personal, and separating it from politics makes it so much easier to have a though-provoking, objective conversation about the vast depth and diversity in humanity's spiritual and philosophical yearnings, imaginings, and meditation.

[Aesthete]

I greatly appreciate your insight on this topic and depth of understanding.

[Lon]

There's something of an equivocation in this formulation. "We don't know what we don't know" can be read as a tautology or as a false statement. For example, I don't know if there is life on other planets. Equally, I know that I don't know whether there's life on other planets. There's nothing about traditional approaches to knowledge that prevent us from understanding limitations on our knowledge.

It'ss doubtful that there's anything we should contemplate that's better grasped by some alternate method of understanding the world. Many serious thinkers have thought there's this realm of ideas that can be grasped but not known. But it isn't clear how one can justify such a claim.

Some would benefit from decreasing their emphasis on material possessions. But it's not clear that there's no limit to how far one can go in this direction before it becomes a negative. Can one understand the suffering of others who lack possessions needed to survive, when one's shunning possessions as a meditative tool? Maybe, but maybe not. And I don't see how one could tell, except by those tedious epistemological approaches of studying the world, reasoning about what one sees in the world, testing hypotheses, etc.

There might be advantages in regard to sheding certain preconceptions in treating a certain kind of religious belief as a state of mind. But taking it to be the key to some kind of experience of things that can't be gotten at through normal means, seems to be a mistake.

[S Andersen]

Well thought out and well written. A fine example of critical thinking. 'Tis a pleasure to read words from an actively engaged mind.

[CollinJE]

"It is that intuitive awareness of the unknown that religion may be used to understand, experience, or connect."

Wouldn't the unknown by definition be impossible to understand, experience or connect with? If you are able to do any of those three things then it would cease to be unknown.

[Arithrianos]

Buddha was 100% opposed to belief, since as you said it cuts off the exploration that is the only way to stay connected to the truth, since the truth changes, it is not fixed at all. Mindfulness is a process, not a destination, it is never finished, but is always complete in that the exploration itself is the truth, not what stories are written about it. An attitude of mind that values the exploration not some rules that arise from it is the real path, the only way to liberation is working it out for yourself, making your own journey, or taking up your own cross as Yeshua said. Noone is going to be able to show you the truth because you already are the truth, it has never been outside.

[OtayPanky]

Arithrianos: Buddha was 100% opposed to belief.

===

Not true at all.

The term BELIEF does not just mean belief in an anthropomorphic diety figure.

The Buddha taught that certain ideas were true, and others false. Those were his beliefs. Talk to a modern Tibetan Buddhist master long enough, and you'll hear a boatload of beleifs - including (for example) the belief in LLAMAISM.

What the Buddha did say is that we should not accept someone else's ideas as truth just because they say so. We need to determine for ourselves which ideas are worth believing - or not.

[Sue Smalley]

you are right....i was trying to convey the sense of awareness of an unknown - not that it becomes known....hard to put that into words as you so clearly point out! thanks

[JohnFromCensornati]

"Nurturing this open and curious attitude of mind arises from these and other things like:
* living with simplicity
* poverty (the letting go of attachment to material things)
* appreciation for the beauty of Nature
* prayer (daily recognition of the Unknown in connection to food, water, or Nature)
* and seeing the extraordinary in ordinary things. "

I have no objection to four of those five, but as an atheist, I fail to see how praying to The Unknown is of any value, not to mention the oddness of concluding that some Unknown thing even has a connection to food, water, or nature.

[CollinJE]

Agreed, I wonder what that prayer to the "Unknown" sounds like?

Also any relation to Stewart, Susan? ( sorry couldn't resist.... :) )

[Sue Smalley]

thanks for the comment.....as for 'prayer' that one throws me too (in the Ohiyesa description) because i'm not one to pray....but, perhaps it can be seen as a means to reflect or appreciate the beauty and sustenance of food, water, trees, etc. in a way that reminds us of the larger 'whole' what we know and are aware of as well as what is unknown....

[willowranch]

For me praying is a meditation at times or a thank you note or just common courtesy. I like to think that I "pray" to my walnut tree for giving shade, food, bird shelter and oxygen.