By Agnes Gnome
Imagine if the foremothers and forefathers (i.e., the foreparents) of present-day homo sapiens had collectively decided, a couple of hundred years ago, that the final limits of science had now been reached and that henceforth, no new science was possible and that if anyone claimed to produce any new science, it would mean that they were frauds or deluded or both and that, hence, at the very least, no one should pay them any attention.
Now, that would have been really absurd, wouldn’t it?
Consider another scenario: Imagine if some centuries ago, our foreparents had declared that humankind had now arrived at the final frontiers of art, that no new art was thereafter possible, and that, therefore, anyone who claimed to develop some new art or to refine an existing form of art was a deviant heretic.
Now, that would have been very silly, wouldn’t it?
Mercifully, our foreparents did no such foolish thing, because of which various sciences and arts have continued to grow and flourish over the centuries, reaching ever new heights, which our foreparents might never have imagined, not even in their wildest dreams. Our foreparents wisely recognized that scope always remains for human beings to progress in various sciences and arts, and that, in fact, such progress must ever continue, never coming to a stop. This is why continuous progress in various sciences and arts has been a conspicuous phenomenon of human history. Recognizing that there is no such thing as the final limits of various sciences and arts and that irrespective of how much progress human beings might make in these fields, further progress is always possible (and, indeed, highly desirable), human beings have been ever keen to ensure that this progress continues and that it never comes to an end.
Curiously enough, though, there is one particular field in which a huge number of human beings seem to be ferociously averse to any progress whatsoever—and that is, the field of religion. While this is certainly not be the case for all religionists, literally hundreds of millions of people who claim to follow this or that religion do seem to think that progress in the field of religion is impossible but is also complete anathema. While advancement, in the form of new knowledge, in the fields of various sciences and arts is lauded, advancement in the field of religious knowledge is heavily frowned upon, and, in some parts of the world, severely punished.
*
Most of the major religions of the world were founded in the distant past, several centuries ago, by certain key figures. Vast millions of their followers today believe that these key figures (whom, since they lived a very long time ago, no presently living person has ever met), represent the apex of religious knowledge, the climax of man’s spiritual journey, beyond which no one can go. So, for instance, these figures are considered to be the last incarnation of God or the final messenger of God or the greatest spiritual master who ever lived or the supremely enlightened one, and so on. The fervently-held belief on the part of vast numbers of their votaries that these figures represent the Absolute Truth in its final form leads to widespread refusal to be open even simply to the theoretical possibility that after these figures departed from the world (which was many centuries ago), any further progress in the field of religious knowledge (such as related to our understanding of key existential questions, including the origins and purpose of the universe, issues of life and death and all that happens in between these two, the best way to live, etc.) is possible. This is because these widely-revered figures are held to be uniquely unsurpassable, in terms of knowledge and also practice, and a model for human beings to emulate for all time to come. Thus, to claim that human beings today can go beyond what this or that such founding figure of this or that religion said, did or taught (leave alone contradict any of it) is regarded by many people as sheer blasphemy, which, in some cases, can lead to a person who makes such a claim (or even simply believes in a person who makes such a claim) being put to death by religious authorities or mobs of irate religionists (this is something that continues to happen in large parts of the world even today).
Insisting that the apex of religious knowledge has already been achieved, and a great many centuries ago at that, and that, therefore, humankind cannot (and dare not seek to) now progress beyond this is as absurd as someone declaring that the apex of scientific knowledge of building shelters has already been achieved, many thousands of years ago, when the ancestors of human beings lived in caves and up in the trees and that, therefore, humankind cannot (and dare not) now progress beyond this by living in huts made of mud, houses made of brick and concrete and multi-storeyed apartment complexes.
*
In other words, for millions upon millions of people, because of the way they understand their religion, human beings now simply cannot make any progress in the sphere of religion, since, according to them, the apex of religious knowledge has already been reached—by their key founding figures—some centuries ago and so cannot be surpassed. This, therefore, means that any claim to progress in this field is considered to be regress, or even dangerous deviance that is punishable with particular harshness. It is as if human beings are now, and for all time to come, too, doomed to be bound by the dictates and dictums of certain individuals who lived centuries ago and that one simply cannot go beyond what they thought, taught and did. The possibility that some things that they thought or taught might not be true or that some things that they did might not be wholesome and that one can discard these teachings and practices in the light of modern scientific knowledge and ethical standards, or even the idea that one can add to their teachings, is regarded as simply inconceivable by huge numbers of people.
*
While such thinking would be considered utterly absurd in the field of various sciences and arts, it is amazing how widely prevalent it is in the field of religion. Although not all religionists think this way, it sufficiently widespread among religionists in general to make it a huge brake on the further progress of humankind.
If vast numbers of religionists are wedded to the idea that whatever their founding figures thought, taught and did some centuries ago is normative and binding for human beings today and also for all time to come and that no progress in this is possible, it is easy to understand that this belief can quickly lend itself to fanaticism, scorn for other ways of understanding the world, hatred for those who do not share one’s religious beliefs, and zealous opposition to modern findings that contradict this or that practice or teaching of the founding figure of this or that religion.
It is little wonder, then, that there seems to be a very close and a very direct link between holding this belief and social, economic, cultural and intellectual backwardness. This belief is as massive a barrier to human progress as would the belief be that human beings are doomed to limit themselves to the particular level of knowledge in the sciences and arts that their foreparents had arrived at a thousand years ago and that they must never (for they supposedly can never) progress beyond that level.
Further, much of the conflict in the name of religion that the world has witnessed down the centuries and continues to witness today has to do with this belief. If rival sets of religionists insist that their particular body of religious beliefs, traced to their founding figures who lived some centuries ago, is the sole representative of Absolute Truth, that all religious truth is contained only within their particular belief system, and that, therefore, no progress can be made beyond it, this very easily leads to a fierce absolutism that results in conflictual relations with people who do not share the same belief.
*
If human beings can be humble enough to readily acknowledge that the limits of their knowledge in the fields of various arts and sciences have not been, and cannot be, reached by them, because scope for progress in these fields always remains, oughtn’t, one might ask, they be equally ready to acknowledge also that the limits in the field of religious knowledge have not been, and cannot be, reached by them and that no matter how much progress they might have made in this field in the past (including through various religions founded by various key figures), scope for further progress in this field will always remain? Refusal to be ready to acknowledge this is a sure recipe for stagnation within and strife without, as human history clearly illustrates.
*
By definition, Absolute Truth can never be attained in its totality by relative or limited being like us homo sapiens. The most that we can hope for in this regard is simply to continue to advance in the direction of Absolute Truth but never getting there finally, once and for all. But that is possible only if we are open-minded enough to admit that no matter how true our truth-claims, drawn from religious and other sources, might be, scope always remains for further progress in this regard, and also that such progress is something laudable, not execrable.
Comments