Opinions about God and Religion - Case Study Example

April 26, Bertrand Russell, HHDL and I: Opinions on God and Religion Few topics engage strong opinions more than the existence of God and the dogmatically-alleged truths of religion. Most people in the world believe whatever they believe because it is culturally familiar. Philosophers try to look beyond the familiar, to consider God and religion more deeply and carefully. This paper will consider three opinions about God and Religion: the opinions of Bertrand Russell, His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama (HHDL), and my own opinion. Bertrand Russell and the Dalai Lama are well-respected philosophers and teachers. Bertrand Russell earned a Nobel Prize for literature and HHDL earned a Nobel Peace Prize. Both have written prolifically on ethics and morality, religion and God. Both are seen as social activists and have clear opinions on the religious philosophy of suffering. They are both atheist. People subscribing to one level of atheist interpretation, a more general one, believe that there is no God, nor divine presence, Spirit or divine law (Rowe 335). Bertrand Russell fits into this category. Individuals subscribing to a more narrow perspective of atheism believe that there is no specific, personalized, divine presence, located somewhere, omnipotent, omniscient, eternal, supreme, perfect, creator of us and the universe (Rowe 335). In the more general definition of atheism, the Dalai Lama would not fit because Tibetan Buddhism has a variety of deities, male and female, and supports the idea of a god realm state of consciousness and manifest reality, sacred space, and Pure Mind. Furthermore, HHDL is considered, by his people, to be a “god-king”, the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people. He administers sacred initiations, like the Kalachakra, and is a Buddhist monk who reveres the Buddha and his teachings, which have both practical and supernatural interpretations (Basic Concepts of Tibetan Buddhism). He can be considered atheist in the narrow sense of the term. Bertrand Russell denies the existence of God by arguing against the motivations people have for affirming God’s existence. Russell argues against the First Cause Hypothesis , which basically says that nothing can spring into existence without cause, so God exists as the First Cause. His argument is that if we accept the First Cause Hypothesis, there would have to be a cause or creator of God. So we must be content with believing that there was no beginning, as we understand it (Russell, 59). The Dalai Lama believes in cause and effect as the web of karma. Our actions and thoughts create and sustain the illusion we think of as reality (Basic Concepts of Tibetan Buddhism). Different actions and thoughts yield a different perception and experience. We must, therefore, learn to calm our thoughts and be intentional with compassionate action. Believing in God is irrelevant. It is for theologians to consider. People, however, have a duty to focus their minds to bring peace (Diane). Russell notes the absurdity of thinking that man is such a superior evolutionary result that a Supreme Being would make him the purpose of the entire, universe, particularly considering men like Hitler and groups like the Klu Klux Klan. Honoring earth’s brief history with man in such a way seems overly optimistic, he says (Russell 61). We are a very small spot in the universe, so it is presumptuous to think a Supreme Being would focus all heavenly efforts so personally on us. HHDL teaches that ignorance and attachment obstruct our perception of perfection inside us. When we look calmly within, without prioritizing ignorance and attachment, then we will be able to know that perfection, and this is enlightenment (Diane). Hitler was attached to his ideas about racial purity and Aryan perfection. His perspective was blocked by the ignorance of failing to understand the unity of all Mind. His attachment to the illusion of racial purity and Aryan perfection resulted in him creating a context of profound suffering for himself and others. A way out of suffering was available to Hitler, but he did not calm his mind, examine his attachment to illusion, and recognize his own perfection. He greatly complicated his karma, consequently. Bertrand Russell argues the claim that a belief in God is morally useful in that we would not behave ourselves without the presence of God. It is not a proof of God’s existence at all. Whether our leaders should try to make us think there is a God, so that our behavior will be more compliant, is a political issue, not a theological one. Moreover, it leads to censorship of non-compliant thoughts. It is difficult to argue the moral usefulness of belief in God, considering that some of the best people have been unbelievers and some of the worst ever have been believers . Organized religion has always opposed moral progress and perpetrated great immorality on people (Russell 69). Cruel persecution has always come from dogmatic belief, and kindness comes with the decrease or absence of dogmatic belief (p.79). Religion is based on fear of the unknown, and the wish for a protector. We are better to put our faith in science, Russell advises, in order to counter our fear (p. 70). Improving the world requires free thought, courage and intelligence not bound by traditions and words from long ago (p. 71). The Dalai Lama points out that religions either advocate morality because of God and an afterlife or because good actions leads to future states of improved existence. He suggests a third way, secular ethics that are based on our common humanity. Secular ethics transcends religion (HH Dalai Lama). He says that compassion is the very core of dharma, that when you embrace and love all and exclude or hate no one and nothing, then your mind comes to be in peace, and conflict melts away. Then fear no longer rules you, your relationship with others, and their relationship to you. There is no threat anymore (Diane). Specific religious words and traditions should be respectfully tolerated, but are less important than compassion. Embodying compassion improves and protects the world. Believing in God and religion does not ground a person in direct experience of truth. That can only come from a calm mind, turned inward (Diane). Another argument is that believing in God makes people happy. Russell notes that religious people are not necessarily happier. Happiness, Bertrand claims, requires food, physical and mental health, social esteem, and affection. Theology is irrelevant to happiness (Russell 70). His Holiness the Dalai Lama suggests that a big part of society’s problems is due to placing so much emphasis on material needs and resources while neglecting moral ethics and inner values. Happiness is the absence of attachment, the presence of inner peace, the lack of threat, all of which come as a result of calming the mind (Diane). If a person wants physical health, and does not have it, then his attachment to what he does not have causes suffering. Letting go of the expectation that happiness can only happen with good health, and focusing instead on calming mind and letting go of attachment, will change the person’s experience relative to health. Theology is indeed irrelevant to this, but being able to implement a method is critical. Buddhism suggests a method that does not rely on a Supreme Creator God. Russell claims that he sees no purpose in the universe and also that he does not even care to see purpose in the universe, finding thus far no evidence of purpose. If God is the purpose, then God is wicked beyond imagining, based on the evidence of suffering. A kind God with all power would surely not find a need to pass around cancer, death and evil. God must be a wicked murderer, if there is a God, and humans who would reverence a wicked murdering God are caught up in an ancient slave psychology, that the master, although evil, is still sovereign (Russell, Is There a God?). Buddhists explain suffering as a result of karma (the complicated network of cause and effect that actions and attitudes over many lifetimes weave into an illusory reality). The Buddhist argument is that we all suffer but there is a way out of suffering, by living in a way that brings us to realize a liberating truth (Shim). Suffering is universal but there is a path out of suffering, and that path is available to everyone. Bertrand Russell raises another argument, that pretty much everyone believes in God and so it must be reasonable to believe and eccentric or even mentally disordered to depart from popular belief. He dismisses this argument by pointing out how history is filled with misguided popular beliefs, and how we routinely view belief systems outside our own as so much superstition, while finding our own to be reasonable. He concludes that there is no reasonable evidence for accepting theological traditions as being based on truth (Russell, Is There a God?). The Dalai Lama says that we should respectfully tolerate all religions, but that human moral progress depends upon secular ethics, without religious conflict. We must transcend religion because it makes no difference which religion we prefer. Irrespective of religion, we must calm our mind, to eliminate threat, and be motivated by compassion, instead of by attachment (HH Dalai Lama). Attachment to religion is just as dangerous as attachment to racial purity, because it leads to dissatisfaction, conflict and threat. Our duty is peace. (Diane) My own opinion is that religion can provide resources for basic human needs: ritual, comfort, motivation, social support, identity, appreciation of deeper thoughts than material-based ones, and a focus for helping initiative. Like food, intoxicants, and sex, however, it can be used to tilt a person or a nation completely out of balance. This can be done intentionally or inadvertently. Religion makes use of trance. Suggestions are accepted at a very deep level. The church acts as hypnotist, by articulating suggestions. Too often, church leaders are imbalanced, unethical, grasping at personal and organizational power, claiming an exclusive monopoly on truth, happiness and answers, including God. This corrupts the process of guiding spiritual evolution. I do not believe there is a “God” sitting in “Heaven”, dispensing judgment, love and redemption to humans on earth. I find this to be a highly dangerous idea, when placed in the wrong hands. Religion provides metaphors and stories that can be useful and comforting, when dispensed by responsible leadership and processed by people who are encouraged to think, question and argue. I respect any religion to the extent that its leaders facilitate freedom of thinking and tolerance of diversity, seeing spirituality as inclusive and not divisive. I disagree with Bertrand Russell’s emphasis on scientific evidence as the measuring stick for belief. Science is also not God and should not be made a substitute for spirituality. I strongly support HHDL’s approach to spiritual values and ethics, beyond religion. The opinions considered in this paper have points of convergence and distinctions of emphasis. That is a good thing because triangulating viewpoints is a viable approach to understanding. Works Cited "Basic Concepts of Tibetan Buddhism." n.d. Brown.edu. Web. 26 April 2012. Diane. "Dalai Lama Speaks - What About God?" 11 April 2009. Spectrum of Beliefs. http://spectrumofbeliefs.blogspot.com/2009/04/dalai-lama-god-what-about-god.htm. 25 April 2012. Lama, HH Dali. Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2011. Print. Rowe, William I. "The Problem of Evil and some Varieties of Atheism." American Philosophical Quarterly (1979): 16(4):335-339. Russell, Bertrand. God and Religion (ed. Al Sekel). New York: Prometheus Books, 1986. Print. —. "Is There a God?" 1952. Thinkers on Religion. http://www.skeptically.org/thinkersonreligion/id15.html. 25 April 2012. Shim, Jae-Ryong. "Evil and the Overcoming of Suffering in Buddhism." Koslowski, P. The Oringin and the Overcoming of Evil and Suffering in the World Religions. Amsterdam: Klrwer Academic Publishers, 2001. 8-23. Read More