A friend asked me the other day if I am religious. I said yes, but I am not sure why. I could not define the word in a Hindu context.
One interpretation is that being religious is equivalent to being a practicing Hindu — being aware of and following the many rich traditions and rituals our culture has to offer. I’ve learned much about this aspect of Hinduism since coming to Harvard, but I still know little, so it is not what I had in mind.
Another interpretation is that being religious is believing in God. My belief in God wavers because I do not consider it central to my beliefs. This, too, is not what I had in mind.
The most reasonable interpretation is that, for me, being religious is having faith. Defining faith as “belief that is not based on proof” (Dictionary.com), I see that this is what I had in mind when I answered my friend. Religion and conviction are inseparable in my mind, and because conviction is the firm belief that point A will lead to point B, this naturally expands into a faith in destiny. Conviction is at its most effective when it is operating in an environment where proofs are impossible — an environment where one has to take things on faith.
Life is an example of such an environment — after all, life does not furnish us with any meaning, any purpose. It is up to us to create meaning from the nothingness, a nothingness in which proofs of meaning are impossible. Religion — specifically, the conviction that comes from faith in a transcendent destiny — is my way of creating meaning from this nothingness.
Related posts:
Post a Comment