The Richness of the Tapestry

What are we to make of the variety and richness which is displayed in the pages that follow?

As with any worthwhile study or series of studies the ultimate intention must be that the reader should see beyond and indeed come to ignore the writers.

The very phrase ‘the religious impulse’ can, how­ever, mislead the unwary into assuming a monotony of similar manifesta­tions in diverse times and places which require no separate attentiveness from those who wish to learn. It would be a similar folly to be misled by talk of‘the artistic impulse’, into assuming that studying the arts of India would add nothing to a moderate acquaintance with the Dutch Masters, or even that those who know well the paintings of Turner will find little additionally to appreciate in the sculpture of Henry Moore. Indeed the broader one’s per­spective and sympathies the less the danger of trying to ‘sum up’ the artistic, or the religious impulse.

Nonetheless, we do use the terms ‘religion’ or ‘art’ to encompass what is diverse in detail and emphasis within one focus of atten­tion, and this volume offers an overview of what (again sometimes by selective example) should fall under the heading of‘the world’s religions’. The question of drawing even notional boundary lines is less simple than might appear at first glance, and in addition to chapters dealing with some of the philosophical issues which arise, there are separate essays devoted to the near neighbours of religion—ideology, agnosticism and atheism.

One common thread in the tapestry is that religious beliefs and practices are not best seen as ‘additions’ to the already full and well-organised lives, or as minor modifications to social structures which can be easily detached from them. Whether for the individual or for society, religious belief and practice is a means of structuring or focusing, not some­thing that comes after the establishment of perspective and pattern. This is not to say that there are not secular alternatives to religion. The crucial point is that religious belief and practice do not belong to the fringes of either social or individual fives. Their abandonment or their adoption implies radical change even if as a matter of fact such change comes about gradually. To reject or adopt ‘religion’ is not like taking up or laying aside a hobby or a club membership. If it seems like that, then there is misperception somewhere. This is perhaps why David Hume wrote, ‘Whereas mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous.’ This raises the difficult question of what constitutes ‘a mistake’ in religion and who, if anyone, is in a position to determine whether or not a mistake has been made.

At one level this book will certainly help here, for within all of the various traditions discussed there are clear indications of what, within that belief system, counts as error and falsehood. The major problems arise when the focus takes in beliefs and practices belonging to more than one religion, and I shall refer to this further in due course. By way of preparation, however, I wish to make two further points.

One of the emphases which is found in religious belief and practice is that far from simply being an adjunct to other areas of life it provides a point of perspective in terms of which to evaluate and organise them. The view provided thus differs from one religious tradition to another, but what they do offer is the possibility that human life is not simply a chronicle of things and events which ultimately are as self-contained as they are random.

A differing but not incompatible emphasis is the importance attached to seeing not only what is true about this world, but the possibility of relating to what lies beyond it. There is clearly much diversity here, for some religions focus very centrally upon ‘escape’ from this world and seek to discern in the world the points, structures or moments of transparency which are the keys to ‘right living’ and, depending upon emphasis, ‘right believing’.

To summarise briefly, I am suggesting that in the variety, diversity and richness of the tapestry there is no single framework or grid within which a neat taxonomy of religions may be produced. The evidence for this is reiterated in detail in the book which follows. Nonethe­less, there is in that mosaic of beliefs and practices which we unhesitatingly include under the general heading of‘religion’, and even in some which are at best distant relatives, a series of points ofinterest of a very general nature. The first is the universality of these phenomena. This is not to say that every human being is a religious devotee, or that every society is affected in equal manner, but undoubtedly the elasticity of the term ‘religion’ and the variety of forms of religion throughout history raise conceptual as well as empirical problems about the identification of a society wholly devoid of all traces of religious beliefs, practice and attitude.

The second point follows from this and reminds us of the dangers of regarding such an observation as a licence to pronounce in general terms about religion without an awareness of the diversity which this book takes as its raison d’etre. What is apparent however is that religious belief and practice are not in essence coincidental or peripheral, though they may become so, and thus gradually decay. Religion which is peripheral to the life of believer or community is in decline. Thus religious belief and practice is the particular rather than the general, to be found on a line of tension between two different but not necessarily incompatible emphases. On the one hand they provide a home, or at least a bivouac, in the buzzing, blooming confu­sion of this world, and on the other a means of seeing through and beyond the immediacy of what surrounds us.