religion

An interesting aspect about most religions is that they try to solve the problem they've previously created themselves. Often some kind of Liberation is offered, the christian salvation, the buddhist enlightenment and the hindu union with God himself; Aka freedom from sin, freedom from attachments and freedom from the material world. At the same time a moral code comes with these religions, which tells you what to do and what not to. It's even subtler. The liberation itself is most often understood as a perfect abiding by these rules. Let me give a few examples.

In buddhism the signs of enlightenment are virtues like compassion and altruism; The realization of emptiness (there being no self), which is in short 'enlightenment', makes doing unselfish acts quite a lot easier. So the goal of buddhist training leads, in theory, to a way of being which serves morality perfectly.

Christians take a somewhat different stance. The jewish practice of trying not to sin and asking forgiveness again and again was far too much trouble. So let's just say sinning is unavoidable. Then we change the rules a bit. Let's make them so abstract and non-practical ('do unto others a you would wish they'd do to you') we can tell the people a) they are sinning and b) they are saved also. No one knows anymore when you are exactly sinning, what sinning actually is. Because of this salvation becomes obscure too: salvation from what? People can invent their own sins and then be freed from their own inventions. That's a nice system and it perfectly serves morality. Even a changing morality. That's why christianity flourished in all sorts of cultures. Everyone assumes violating the (specific) moral code in the country and time in which they live must be sinful.

The Hindu faith is even more uncomplex. They don't even try to hide the idea that enlightenment is synonymous with being moral. Evil actions, which produce karma, hinder someones comprehension of the divine. So when you behave most appropriate you'll automatically acquire a godly state of mind.

It's not strange that attaining enlightenment is so difficult. If enlightenment is comprehended as liberation, it must be freedom from the human condition; being limited by a material body, being obliged to do work, having to display certain conduct towards others, being an unique person. One aspect about being human, is the being bound to this condition. This can be hard to accept, especially if religion doesn't instill this kind of acceptance from youth on, but actively puts people on the wrong route.

To my opinion religion should focus on a contemplation of the human condition. To answer questions like: what's it like to be human? what do humans do? how do humans function? Far too long religion was at war with the human condition: not being able to give a clear picture of human nature. It's very important to know deeply what you are in order to be able to accept and appreciate it.

In a certain way it's very easy to be afraid of life. If one for example does not understand sexuality this may seem very frightening, especially if you have some desires which in your culture are not considered 'normal', like homoseksuality or pedophilia. It's easy to jump to the conclusion that there must be something fundamentally wrong with being human. Religion functions in these cases as an escape-route. Yes, of course there's something wrong with humans, religion says: They live in sin! They are not yet enlightened! The atman is not connected to the paramatman! Appreciating life fully can sometimes demand a lot of courage.

The basic stance a honest religion should take is saying there's nothing fundamentally wrong with human nature. A total acceptance of life should be instilled in it's followers, instead of idle dreams of liberation.