Concerning Religion
The pitfalls of the rational husk and the elusiveness of the mystical kernel
I have been receiving inquiries and messages from friends and others regarding my recent references to questions of religion and faith. It appears necessary to offer two clarifications.
Firstly, I frequently employ the term 'religion' to denote different things, lacking the mental rigidity to consistently distinguish between them in every utterance: (1) I refer to religion in its highest sense as faith. (2) I speak of religion as an outlook on humanity, life, and the world, representing an attitude toward being. (3) I describe religion in its most concrete sense as comprising manmade institutional compositions of legends, texts, doctrines, institutions, laws, etc., which ultimately forge identity, group solidarity, and political implications. The first is a source and culmination of man's salvation, an object of both theological and philosophical mysticism. The second pertains to the religious anthropology that cultivates man's virtue. The third primarily concerns structuring, containing, and ordering the first two, generating order, control, and power over human life, ostensibly to prevent its squandering.
My deepest interest in religion lies primarily in the first and second ones. Regarding the third, I remain deeply critical, skeptical, and hostile only to the extent that it tyrannizes and obliterates even the faintest memory of the first two. This last interpretation of religion is often mistaken for the former and has historically been a source of heart and mind blindness rather than guidance. It also holds the most immediate political implications. However, the current postmodern experience of rapid social disintegration and deconstruction in Western secular societies has recently underscored the sociological importance of the third aspect of religion, its mechanisms of social control, and the social order it fosters. Despite my alarm and chronic suspicion of this aspect, I have come to acknowledge its sociological challenge without overlooking its inclination towards both rational and political tyranny, a trait it shares with totalitarian ideologies such as leftism, fascism, etc. (I do, however, reject the notion that sociological considerations alone could or should justify religion in any form.) Moreover, any mystic must admit, even begrudgingly, that it is the (3) that often acts as a rational husk for the spiritual kernel.
The second clarification pertains to my reluctance to engage in public discussions about my personal relationship with or understanding of faith. This stems from a desire to protect faith itself, not me. In our era, politics have almost entirely supplanted and subsumed religion to the extent that most individuals fail to discern any meaningful distinction between the two. This phenomenon is pervasive, affecting people of all faiths worldwide. Countless individuals perceive their 'religion' as primarily a political ideology or, conversely, view their political ideology as the ultimate religion. Furthermore, many young people seem to have adopted religious conversion to various minority religions not as a path to truth, but as a means to secure a political platform.
I find this use of religion to be a profound abuse of humanity, religion, and politics. Therefore, I do not wish to reinforce this misunderstanding and aim to avoid any impression that my political engagement is in any way linked to personal faith or religion, or that my advocacy for certain causes is part of a religious quest. While my political views are rational, my morals may not be. In fact, I view my political involvement as the greatest impediment and hindrance to my spiritual 'pilgrim's progress.'
Lastly, I wish to clarify that my stance is not intended as a moral judgment or condemnation of those who find solace in religion, seeking community, structure, or a sense of belonging. Such comforts are essential, making human life more tolerable. While any rational discourse, just by virtue of being language, tends towards rigidity and tyranny, I do not adopt the role of a dogmatic inquisitor demanding pure faith. C.S. Lewis once suggested that individuals find their way to God, or God finds them, through various means – be it marriage, a need for community, aesthetic passion, a desire for order in chaotic lives, or the pursuit of a new identity. My aim is merely to elucidate my references to religion in my writing.
Hello Hussein, I've enjoyed your writings and point of view greatly.
That essay on "antisemitism is a humanism" (to paraphrase Sartre) was so on target, I could barely sit in my chair. The classic history of this question that exposes the roots of leftist antisemitism (including the Soviet variety that lies at the root of much of what we're seeing on American campuses) is Paul Lawrence Rose's German Question/Jewish Question: Revolutionary Antisemitism in Germany from Kant to Wagner (1990). It's a book that should have put to rest once and for all that idea that the German thread of antisemitism was "conservative" or "reactionary." It was and is a modern, modernizing, and revolutionary force. If we took off our Marxist spectacles for once, we would see this -- the Marxist claims about "fascism" were designed, in part, precisely to obfuscate the very real connections between Marxism and leftism generally and antisemitism.