Humankind has always pondered the origins of life. It is only natural to question our own existence. After all, why do we occupy the space in which we reside, work, play, and breathe? As David Byrne asked in the song by the Talking Heads, “how did I get here?”
Mircea Eliade goes beyond just delving into to question of where we have come from; he also points out the prospect of “is there more?” Whether one is religious or agnostic, this question of the existence of a divine realm is rooted in human nature, of something that transcends the two-dimensional world. In the reading, we are presented with the differences between the sacred space and the profane space.
The difference between a skeptic and a religious individual is the acknowledgment of sacred space. The religious man sees the church, cathedral, synagogue, mosque, or any temple as a manifestation of the divine on earth. While these structures may be a mere "religious institution" to the non-believer, the religious individual sees them as a sacred space detached from the "surrounding cosmic milieu"(26).
Eliade sums up the religious man's mission regarding cosmogony at the end of the reading. Eliad iterates that the religious man's nostalgia is to inhabit a "divine world"(65). In other words, the desire to live in "when it came fresh from the Creator's hands" (65). This, according to Eliade, is the religious individuals belief that their sacred space is at the cosmic center of the universe (42).
While Eliad may argue that the religious individual will find sanctuary in a space in which he or she may be "closer to the gods"(65), the agnostic or the non-believer should not be discounted as one who does not see the world as merely two-dimensional. The religious individual will point out the non-religious man's disbelief in the divine. However, that does not mean that the non-religious are not unconcerned or uninterested in the meaning of life. To imply this would be assuming that atheists and agnostics merely animals without a deeper cause. The difference is that the religious individual will use his or her religious beliefs in answering the questions of humankind's existence on earth. As for the non-religious, the evolution of the philosophy of the meaning of life shows that religion is definitely not the only venue for seeking answers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm sure self-proclaimed agostics such as Albert Einstein, Charles Darwin, Carl Sagan, Bill Gates, or Matt Groening would agree with you.
ReplyDeleteYour comment is clear and concise when dissecting Eliade’s writing. The evolution of the meaning of life will forever manifest with every generation. Our amazement and quest can be seen as an enlightening religious ritual/experience or a meaningful philosophical one, like you suggest. Neither scenario should be devalued, for it is all in how you interpret your belief in religion or lack there of. I think religious and non-religious people have more in common than we'd like to agree on, it's the degrees of self worldliness and exaggerated divineness, that separates us. Unnecessary finger pointing to those who believe things differently suggests intolerance in itself, when tolerance is crucial and necessary if we want to continue sharing the same space.
ReplyDelete