Religionists ‘imagine’ that their belief system is comprised of a higher knowledge which ‘survives’ the ‘dying’ process and even pre-exists the ‘conception’ and ‘birthing’ mechanisms! Of course, there is no evidence for either of these conjectures with ALL evidence being to the contrary. Therefore, the truth claims are not correct. However, as a regulatory device within society, and given the deep habit religion still maintains throughout much of human society, religion can be useful. The problem is that those who existentially adhere to the teachings of religion, also literally believe in the extraordinary claims of those religions. In other words, religion is not merely a vehicle for existential regulation, but is also a guarantor for what is believed to be what comes after physical death. If an individual or group dedicate their lives to following the religion here and now, then the promises made by the theology are believed to come into play (regardless of the outrageous nature of those claims). As these pre-birth and post-death claims have no basis in observable fact, there is no reason for existential society to be premised upon these claims as it is a pointless exercise and a lack of resources. There is no point constructing a physical society in a manner which reflects the unscientific claims of theology and religious philosophy. Although an interesting experiment in the combination of the human imagination and the ability to physically organise and construct buildings whilst directing all human endeavour, science is neither recognised or even known! In such a society, progression is stultified with the present always defined as conforming to a regressive ideal that that has emerged arbitrarily from the human imagination. As each such religious ideal is intolerant toward difference and totalitarian in both essence and deployment, each human grouping that has developed such am ‘inverted’ organisation of society is a priori antagonistic to all other competing modes of human social and cultural organisation. Marx identifies that a thought in the head is mistaken as a concrete object in the material universe. In other words, a set of thoughts appearing in the mind are mistaken for a set of processes in the physical universe. As there is no corresponding physical presence or mechanical process in the material universe, it becomes obvious that such religious constructs are ‘inverted’ in nature. Religion them, is a thought in the head mistaken for an object in the physical universe – an object that does exist. Religion is comprised of the shadows of the human imagination which generates phantasms as manifestations of human fear of the unknown. Buddhism, of course, is an interesting exception to this analysis which has the potential of clearing the human-mind of all regressive and inverted mind patterns and can reveal the raw dialectical reality that Marx and Engels appear to have been born knowing quite naturally. In this regard, when Buddhism is freed of its accrued religiosity, it can be used productively for Revolutionary organisation, that is to change society from its regressive and exploitative stage to that of progressive Socialism in preparation for Communism.
0 Comments
Given that the inner content of the mind is a reflection of the external world, then all religiosity is false in that it is a misreading of that external stimuli. For any spiritual path to be effective, it must ‘see through’ the fog of religion and the confusion of the inner mind. None of the images constructed in the inner fabric of the mind represents anything other than what they are – namely ‘disconnected’ and ‘disparate’ phantoms of light and shade. Religion is constructed from this jumble of nonsense when the capacity for logical thought is applied to it. The logic capacity of the mind chops and resizes all this mad kaleidoscopic light show and generates a type of ‘plausibility’ that fills in the huge gaps of credibility through mindless ‘faith’. None of it is real, but due to a cultural and historical lack of clarity of thought, even the most intelligent of individuals still consider it a possibility that the irrationality this religiosity represents might well be ‘true’ when viewed in the right light, or given the right conditions, etc. The fact that none of it ever makes any independent sense, is lost even on the greatest of minds! Meditation, when uncoupled from its associated religiosity becomes a vehicle through which the empty nature of the inner mind can be perceived. This is achieved by the ‘attention’ capacity ‘detaching’ itself from the ‘thought content’ so that it is no longer experienced through the illusion of some kind of substantiality. When detached, these thoughts no longer present anything than what they are – phantoms and light shows within the inner mind. Instead of the ‘awareness’ capacity being limited to the thought constructs themselves, it ‘spreads’ to encompass the entire physicality of the inner mind itself, generating an ‘expansion’ of awareness. This is a very real experience. Furthermore, as the awareness is now fully extended throughout the terrain of the inner mind, it is emphasised and extended through the six senses so that the awareness also permeates the inner body. This appears to extend into the physical environment through the sense-organ – sense data dichotomy. This is how the ‘awareness’ capacity when freed from attachment to thought constructs and the misreading of inner (irrational) phantasms as cogent religion – appears to ‘expand’ into and ‘through’ the physical environment. This is not a mysterious event but rather an evolutionary necessity that has become lost through the complexities of modern living. The point is that it is possible to free the awareness from the tyranny of constructed and conditioned thought forms and thought patterns, etc. When this happens, the thought capacity appears to manifest as if in a deep pool of silver-like water, which ‘reflects’ inwardly all it encounters in the external environment. Despite the accuracy of this reflection, religiosity derives from the natural distortion of this capacity (which appears to be a by-product of human evolutionary adaptation). Whether accurate or inaccurate, however, none of these reflections are ‘real’ in the material sense. Thought forms are the creations of bio-chemical interactions that ‘cease’ at the point of physical death. It is possible to understand all these processes prior to death, and to free the awareness of attachment to form following a relatively straightforward course in meditative self-development. Not only is the awareness capacity ‘freed’, but so is the logic capacity which evolved to ‘order’ thoughts. When freed from the rigid thought constructs conditioned throughout history, this type of enhanced logic can be used to strengthen and develop Socialist science to an ever-greater degree! Physical death then becomes an exercise in the logical closing-down of the bio-chemical processes of the body which sees the perception capacity quite literally ‘folding-in’ upon itself. There is nothing to fear and everything to gain!
Although the Buddha expresses a logic and reason very similar to that exhibited by the Greeks, he is emerging from a very different socio-economic base. Marx saw this and referred to Buddhist philosophy as being a ‘rational Brahmanism’. As with everything Marxian, this description is comprised of a far greater depth of meaning than the surface words appear to denote and the length of sentence suggests! ‘Rational’ in that like the Greeks, the Buddha is attempting to distinguish his method from the historical religiosity of India, and create a method that appears thoroughly ‘modern’ in its assessment of matter and psychological and physical processes. The term ‘Brahmanism’ denotes the vast and ancient religiosity within which the Buddha was born, out of which his mind and body eventually ‘grew’. The Greeks, of course, possessed a pantheon of gods just as the Brahmans were polytheistic. In this respect, the two systems were similar. The Greeks expected to find numerous gods being worshipped by the various (non-Greek) peoples of the world and made allowances for encountering these unknown entities. (This is why the Greeks possessed a ‘god with no-name' as a matter of accommodation). The Brahmins – like the Jews, however – viewed their system as already complete and essentially intolerant of any other religious system of religious organisation. The Jews would eventually develop the notion of monotheism whereas the Greeks would not. The Buddha would emerge out of Brahmanism and declare it ‘incorrect’ - just as the Jew known as Jesus Christ would emerge out of Judaism and declare his religion incomplete and ready for transformation! The Greeks would make a clean break with religiosity by developing ‘philosophy’ - which like the Buddha’s ideology is always moving away from religious thought. It would be the later Christian who would seize Greek philosophy and distort its underpinnings and interpretation so that it could be superimposed upon a new form of Judaism and referred to as ‘Christian theology’! This is why Greek terms are found all the way through Christian theology but used in a thoroughly incorrect manner. Even amongst modern philosophers there is the habit of using the pagan Germanic term ‘soul’ in place of the Greek ‘psyche’ - which was co-opted by the Christians as they tried to convert these tribal people. Soul originally referred to the spirituality of water (an idea common in pre-Christian Europe), but the Christians took this term and transposed it with the term ‘psyche’ (‘breathe of life’) which the Greeks used to describe the ‘spark’ of existence that explodes into physical and conscious life at the point of conception in the womb! For the Christian missionary, the German ‘soul’ became that spiritual entity which existed separate and distinct to the physical body and mind, and which entered the mind and body at conception and left the mind and body at death! As the Christian first borrowed the Greek ‘psyche’ to describe this entity, they soon became dissatisfied with its close approximation to Greek thought and decided to obscure reality further by co-opting yet another alien concept in a drive designed to demonstrate both ‘uniqueness’ and ‘difference’ from Judaism! The Buddha, of course, understood that all religious thinking depended upon an imagined spiritual entity existing somewhere out-there – which was intimately linked to each individual human through an ‘atma’ (atman) or ‘soul’. Through this ‘connection’, the Brahmins stated that the supreme God Brahma controlled a) each individual life, and b) ensured the functioning of Indian society through the caste system. Any obvious or deliberate attempt to contradict this ‘will of god’ would be met with a terrible re-birth and a hellish karma. Conform to the injustices of Brahma’s will – or face a terrible re-birth! The Buddha decided to see if any of this was true and embarked upon a number of well-known spiritual paths all linked to the religion of Brahma. He followed at least six distinct meditative and ascetic paths to their full completion and realised they did not go where their teachers claimed they went, and did not bestow the knowledge the teachers claimed they did. Through submitting his mind and body to the severe discipline required of these paths – an undertaking many others could not do – the Buddha empirically ‘proved’ that the Brahmanical religion was incorrect!
Although I do not believe in the literal reality of any religious teaching – my academic speciality is that of ‘religious thought’ and ‘religious practice’. This follows on in the Soviet tradition and the current situation in Mainland China. As various ethnic groups are required to be ‘integrated’ into the Socialist System, an expert knowledge of religious knowledge at the political level is required to implement this transition. A Socialist or Communist academic living in a Marxist-Leninist State, must be free of any religious ideology in the primitive sense, and be able to objectively study, understand and predict the behaviour of those who ‘literally’ believe in religious mythology. Such an academic is an advanced dialectical human-being who understands Marxist-Leninism (and its variants) exactly, and is no longer inhabiting the ‘inverted’ mind-sets that propagated religious ideology in the first place! The rational human mind must be brought into play to clear the ‘fog of religion’ as Lenin called it – whilst still understanding why religious groupings think and act as they do. This understanding is crucial to predict problems before they start, and to guide the religious communities into thoughts and behaviours more complicit with life in a progressive, Socialist society! Religion is transitioned into a ‘private’ affair for the masses, and is removed’ from the ‘public’ space. Religion is moved from all positions of political power and business interference! As religion was originally a vehicle for personal salvation in an indifferent world – these changes must be explained to the religious groupings in a manner that they understand without conflict or resistance! This is not always an easy task, but it is an essential task. Religion, like philosophy, can be fully understood by the secular and atheistic mind. Once it is understood, it can be guided and moulded so that it benefits from being within a Socialist States, and yet does not interfere in the political process. Furthermore, as the ‘classroom’ is separated from the ‘Church’ - religious leaders must be taught to understand the ‘new’ rights that his community now possess. Conservativism is now no longer required or allowed, and so a religious leader must take responsibility in guaranteeing that his community is able to register for welfare, housing, medical employment and education opportunities – offered either free of charge or highly subsidised by the Socialist State! All religions must now support the Socialist System and have no relationship with the bourgeois community or reactionaries of any kind. Should a religious leader enquire ‘how’ he or she is supposed to present these requirements to his or her community – a Political Commissar tasked with integrating religious groupings into the Socialist System must be ready with a profound and relevant answer that can be clearly explained and put into action!
For Marx religion is like a fix of opium designed to take the minds (and bodies) of the collective working-class off of the daily suffering implicit within the life of a capitalist society! Whilst for Lenin, religion of any sort is nothing but a ‘fog’ which distorts the collective thinking of the working-class. Furthermore, Marx exposes the underlying philosophical premise of any form of theism as being the product of ‘inverted’ thought processes, or to put it another way, a body of knowledge built upon a foundation of illogical thinking and incorrect conclusions. Marx explains that the idea of an ‘all-knowing’ God is nothing but a ‘thought’ in the human mind – a product of wishful thinking and imagination – which is then mistaken as existing ‘independently’ somewhere ‘out there’ in the universe. This argument is as powerful as it is simplistic and straightforward. For Marx, the vast body of theological literature does not matter – as it is all premised upon a false understanding of reality that relies upon ‘blind faith’ to exist and continue to exist. This is where religion receives its greatest support, as ‘faith’ does not require logical though or correct scientific scrutiny to ‘exist’ and ‘function’ throughout society. The Church Authorities are political entities that support the predatory capitalist system, and they sustain this influence (regardless of its obvious ‘corruption’) through the propagation of the agency of ‘faith’. Just as the Medieval Church gained its political power by aligning itself with the imperial Roman apparatus – modern Christianity has been developed by the bourgeoisie to represents its own best class interests – and grew-out of the process of industrialisation over the last four-years or so. Modern Christianity, therefore, exists as a statement of class dominance by the bourgeoisie which masquerades as a vehicle for personal development and deliverance. By transferring ‘religion’ from the ‘public’ to the ‘private’ sphere – as Marx and Lenin agree – the power-mongering of its modern priesthood is dismantled and disempowered. Religious doctrine is then replaced into a position of its founding – where it becomes a vehicle for self-cultivation with NO political ambitions or political power. An argument can be made that by placing religion into the ‘private’ sphere – religion is being returned to its ‘genuine’ state and purpose of being a vehicle for ‘inner’ development. This private-undertaking should be the only ‘lawful’ function that religious possesses. The ideology of Marxist-Leninism suggests that as times unfolds throughout a ‘Socialist’ society (which sees the working-class seizing control of the means of production) - it is believed that the ‘impulse’ toward religion will eventually die-out quite naturally as society is transformed from one of exploitation’ to that of ‘collective co-operation' - from ‘daily suffering’ to ‘daily collective and personal empowerment’! As the outward aspect of social organisation becomes ‘classless’, ‘just’, ‘productive’ and ‘equalitarian’, etc, the ‘inner’ health and vibrancy of the human-condition will becomes so ‘purified’, ‘positive’ and ‘progressive’ that there will no longer appear the impulse for the need for religion to arise as a psychological, emotional and physical habit. Therefore, Marxist-Leninist ideology offers a critique of religion that is so devastating to the Bourgeois Church that its power-brokers would rather support the ideology of ‘fascism’ and declare Marxism to be ‘evil’ than honestly and truthfully face the allegations levelled by Marx and striving to work with its conclusions rather than propagandising against it. Religion, if handled the right-way, can be useful for the development of a Socialist society, with any Socialist government possessing the moral responsibility of ‘integrating’ religionists into a new Socialist world-order with as little friction as possible. ACW (15.4.2021)
|
AuthorAdrian Chan-Wyles PhD - Political Commissar and BMA (UK) Historian & Researcher. Archives
April 2024
Categories
All
|