RATIONAL RELIGION
It is common nowadays to speak of
religion and rationality as though they are mutually exclusive, as though never
the twain will, or can, meet.
This premise should not be accepted as
a foregone conclusion. It needs to be carefully examined. Upon doing so, we
will see that it is in gross error.
The basic premises of religionists and
atheists, the latter of whom claim that they are
rationalists and hold sole claim to rationality, are equally non-rational. To
say that we can reasonably posit the existence of a Being that is Ineffable,
wholly non-corporeal, without qualities of any kind and so vastly beyond our
comprehension that we cannot begin to fathom It, is a
wholly irrational position. Such a position may be taken on an experiential claim,
on the basis of hope that such a Being exists or on blind faith, but it is not
a rational statement.
The position of the atheists is
equally irrational. To say that we can, with any degree of certainty
whatsoever, posit that there does not exist a Being that is Ineffable,
wholly-incorporeal, without any qualities of any kind and so vastly beyond our
comprehension that we cannot begin to fathom It, is a
wholly irrational position as well. The only difference between this position
and the former is that this position is one that smacks of hubris.
Having demonstrated that the starting
points of both the religionists and the atheists are equally without rational
basis, we can proceed to examining whether or not rationality can play any part
in a religious take on the world.
The afflatus of this treatment of the
subject is a new restaurant, the owner and founder of which, Ya'akov Avni (brother of the
actor Aki Avni) insists that it not be called a soup
kitchen, which opened in the most disadvantaged area of the city of Tzfat, the
notorious South (where the author of this essay chooses to make her home).
The restaurant provides full-course
meals to come whoever may, no questions asked, for the price of two NIS (about
47 cents American). Great pains have been, and are, taken to provide not only
nutritious meals, but to having created a pleasant ambiance in the restaurant,
having the meals served by a staff of dedicated volunteers with respect and a
smile and giving those who patronize the restaurant the feeling that they are
coming to dine (thus the nominal charge) and not having favors dished out to
them by a charity.
One can find equally rational and
pseudo-scientific reasons for feeding the poor, making them feel wanted and
cared for and not. So, it is not therein that the rationality resides.
Having made the leap of faith and
deciding to feed the poor and give them a feeling of honor and dignity, the
rationality comes in in the planning and
implementation of the programme.
It takes a great deal of rational,
systematic and methodical thinking to plan such a project, implement it and
keep it going.
One has, first and foremost, to
rationally and correctly assess the socio-economic situation in which people
are found. One must then determine correctly and rationally the needs of real
people in real situations. Next, one has to rationally and correctly assess
one's own abilities to help them. One has to be able to formulate a plan or programme of assistance in one's mind. Having done so, one
has then to arrange for subsidization of the food costs and costs of operation.
One has to systematically go about finding an umbrella organization that will
assist the program if need be and find donors. One has to go about finding
suppliers of the food, buying the necessary equipment, furnishings, arranging
the permits from the city, paying the bills, finding the fitting staff for the
operation and do on.
Rationality comes into religion in the
application of its principles.
Rationality can not be said to be the
basis either for a religious position or lack of it, as we demonstrated at the
outset of the essay. It must reside in how we carry out the articles of our
faith and what we believe to be right.
To date, because many Human societies
are so very cruel and do not provide for Human needs rationally or with
compassion, people have turned to religion for all the wrong reasons. People
turn to God in desperation: for the love they do not get from others, for the
security that society does not provide them with, for the fulfillment of their
hopes and dreams that society does not allow or has dashed and so on. They come
in desperation and, as an inevitable result, their religious practice is
pathological.
A society that will foster healthy
religion must be created. We cannot dismiss the possibilities of what religion
can be and can offer in healthy societies based on the reasons that people turn
to religion in sick societies.
I have witnessed in the secular
Kibbutz Movement, on wealthy kibbutzim the residents of which have all of their
socio-economic needs provided for, that a feeling of superficiality and
meaningless begins to creep into the hearts and minds of a good percentage of
the members. They begin to feel that, though they have everything they need and
want materially, something profound is yet missing. Some of those who feel that
way, and they are a goodly number, turn to religion.
They turn to religion not in
desperation, not in fear, not in loneliness and not in insecurity or need. They
turn to religion for a final fulfillment.
The religion that they consider is
based on their traditional religion, but they are not afraid to experiment with
new forms of ceremony or discard those which do not seem meaningful to them.
They feel free to innovate, to question and to improvise. This to my mind is
all very healthy and I believe that were we all living in a communalistic
society, as are the members of the Kibbutz Movement, this seminal
spiritual/moral enterprising would arise spontaneously and would prove to be
fecund, producing new expressions of ancient religions and new religions that
would provide the deepest fulfillment of the Human experience.
Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan,
Tzfat, Israel