Institutional and non institutional beliefs

Institutional religions and non-institutional beliefs.

By Dorit Kedar 

Institutional religions tend to be transcendental, that is to believe in a Creator who is beyond the creatures’ world of matter.

Thus the believers, in all civilizations, have built different temples for worship.

A sacred place for the assembly to meet and worship the gods, responds to a primordial instinct, according to which, the Divine is envisaged through the criteria of time and space.

Thus, humanity has infinity myths of creation with a variation of place and time indication.

Moreover the Divine has a biography of his own: The god decides if and how to create the world and all sentient beings, whom to choose as a representative on earth, whom to send as a messenger bridging heaven and earth, whom to bless and whom to curse.

Religions which are based on an assumed historical event tend to have an absolute truth characterizing the territory of the specific believers.

This truth or corpuses of truths are channeled by commandments and prohibitions.

The believer is to follow the credo in order to attain eternal bliss.

It is though the believer’s choice not to follow the credo, but he or she would have to be responsible for their destiny, which will be of eternal curse and doom.

Institutional religions demand discipline and fulfilment of the Law.

Trends as Zen Buddhism, Taoism, Tantra, believe in building an inner temple out of awareness and consciousness.

The Divine is grasped immanently.

The experience of the Divine is a metaphysical idiosyncratic sensation, which could not be expressed by any fixed concept or definition.

The truth is not collective neither absolute. It is relative to the believer’s way of believing and feeling.

Therefore, lacking the historical context, heaven and hell are internal sensations, dependent on the ability to be relevant to whatever occurs.

One does not develop religiosity by following an external law but by developing inner awareness towards the non-separation of one own person and whatever occurs for Reality embraces both believer and surrounding as one dynamic entity.










About Dr. Dorit Kedar

Forced to continuously change nations, cultures and schooling - I had to develop a wider sense of communication, a way of thinking-feeling-behaving which stresses the common denominators. The need to adapt new landscapes and land-souls has taught instinctive means to overcome separatism, prejudices, dogmatic beliefs and suspicions. While looking for the common gathering denominators, I have also increased the ability of perception and individuation. Being constantly in estranged places has triggered psychological processes to turn the unfamiliar into familiar. As an art critic in the Israeli press, a curator, a writer - have always dealt with the otherness, the different and the infinite variety of the Existent. My Book of Peace is the result.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.