The other path to salvation takes the opposite approach. It does not use images to reach what is beyond appearance. It tries to empty itself of the illusion of the self by the practice of meditation. By learning to sit still and ignore the discomfort of their bodies and the distractions that race through their minds, its practitioners try to empty themselves of the illusion of the self and achieve union with the Real. But meditation is not a quick fix either. The sense of union it brings is fleeting. And the empty mind soon fills up again with all its familiar cravings and distractions. That is why, in pursuit of a permanent state of self-forgetfulness and union with the One, some abandon all earthly attachments and become wandering beggars who live a life of complete self-denial. They suppress the needs of the body that bind them to this life in order to lose themselves in the One who alone is real.


Asked about this, the President pointed out that anyone with complete conviction about anything, especially if that person was an expert, was bound to shake anybody who had an open mind. That, he went on, is the advantage of having a closed mind.

For the closed mind the only struggle left in life is the battle to impose its views on everyone else. The technical name for this kind of certainty is orthodoxy, from the Greek word meaning true or right belief.


The fact that Zoroaster, a priest, was murdered by another priest reminds us again of one of religion’s strongest characteristics: its capacity for violent disagreement. This is because the ultimate source of religion is a place we cannot survey in the way that the size of a remote island might be measured to settle a dispute. The source of religion is off-earth in a reality beyond this one. Its secrets are disclosed to us by prophets who claim to have penetrated its mysteries. They announce to the world what their voices have told them and a new religion is born. But since every new religion is seen as an attack on an old one, it’s no surprise that the priests of the old one always gang up on the prophets of the new one.


Its message was that because of their limited vision humans were incapable of achieving perfect knowledge of ultimate reality, so they should be modest about the religious claims they make.

In spite of that warning, the prophets and sages of religion are rarely in doubt about their beliefs, because they have “seen” and “heard” what lies behind the veil that hangs between humans and ultimate reality.


Hindu sages saw the turning of the wheel of karma and rebirth and the endless circling of time itself. And these ideas became the central doctrines of Indian religion.

Jewish prophets saw the One True God who, when the time was ripe, would send his messiah to bring history to a close, the hope that sustains many believing Jews to this day.

Zarathustra saw a final conflict between good and evil at the end of time, in which good would triumph.


It’s worth thinking about these stories for a moment because they tell us much about how religion works. Are they true or false? That depends on what you think their purpose is. Do you remember the story of the prophet Nathan told Kind David? Was that true or false? Factually it was false. There was no rich man who had stolen a poor man’s lamb. But morally it was true. It was invented to make David think about what he had done. And it worked. It had the truth of art, not the truth of science. Science is interested in facts, the way things work. Art is interested in revealing to us the truth of our own lives. That’s why a story can make you cry out in recognition: that’s me! Religion is an art, not a science. So the question to ask of a creation story is not whether it is true or false, but what it means, what it’s trying to tell us — a distinction many religious people never got hold of.


And religion is also good at getting people to accept the rules and regulations imposed on them by society. If you want humans to live in harmony with each other they’ll need an agreed set of customs — a morality. Don’t tell lies. Don’t steal. Don’t kill. Any intelligent community would protect itself with prohibitions like these. What religion does is to add weight to the rules by saying that they were not a human invention, they were a divine command. So another of religion’s big roles in history has been as the guardian of morality.


Of all the fruit trees in the garden, only one was forbidden to them. This was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Adam and Eve lived a life of unchanging childlikeness, their every need met by God. Parents sometimes think they’d like to keep their children young forever. But the children can’t wait to grow up and discover the knowledge of good and evil for themselves. That was the urge that prompted Adam and Eve to eat of the forbidden fruit. And their minds were immediately flooded with the knowledge that life was no longer simple.


As well as being a prophet Muhammad was a warrior who led his followers in battles against the opponents of Islam. He saw no contradiction in the roles. His wars were not fought for the thrill of battle or the delights of plunder, though no doubt many of his followers enjoyed both. War was an instrument of his spiritual purpose and if we are going to understand him — or any of the other religious leaders in history who used violence to achieve their ends — we must try to get inside his mind.

The first thing to get hold of is that for visionaries like the Prophet life on earth was not an end in itself, something to be enjoyed for its own sake. It was as fleeting and poignant as the cry of the muezzin. It was an opening flourish, a prelude to the main act waiting for us beyond death where the real show began. The purpose of our stay on earth was to determine how we would spend the life without end that was waiting for us on the other side.


Fundamentalist don’t debate. They don’t try the evidence. They deliver a sentence. And it’s always “guilty” because their holy book has already decided the issue. This means that the crisis of fundamentalism in our time, including its violent versions, poses a question that goes to the heart of religions that claim to be based on a revelation that came directly from God.