Socio-economics of religion - 1

Although spirituality is universal, the particular approach taken to practice or attain it, which is what religion is, is quite heavily dependent on socio-economics of the polities where it develops. I feel, this is something not often considered, when people talk about various religions or even one particular religion, through time. Even the same religion, is often not the same through time, as socio-economics changes. Swami Vivekananda often emphasized this point, but at the time when I first read his thoughts, I did not realize its profundity.

Take, for example, Hinduism. In the high-tide of the Vedic age, the religion was earthy, heroic and very much 'this-worldly'. But by late Vedic period, as the immense diversity of the Indian subcontinent started to crack up the Vedic polity, other-worldly asceticism took roots. The socio-economics of the late Vedic period became dour and sensitive thinkers began to become totally disillusioned by the state of a society that they could not be part of did not have the power to change. Ascetic Upanishadic and Shramana doctrines were propounded. While world-affirming realism characterized the earlier religious outlook, world-weary idealism became the mainstay of the later religious outlook. When the Indian polity recovered later and large stable states were established by the early AD's, again this morbid asceticism was marvellously re-synthesised into the fabric of the society in the form of 'ashrama' dharmas. However again during the medieval period when the Indian society was under immense shock due to repeated disruption of the society by a multitude of often brutal attacks and invasions, religion became obsessed with the 'other-world'. The excessive dalliance with morbid things such as death, graveyards, sexual extremes, cannot but be understood, without reference to this context; the social fabric was under immense stress, and the whole social order was torn apart, leading to many broken individuals. Not much was left to live for, and hence the fascination with death and devastation.

This is similar with Christianity too. The religion began in a Jewish society that was under immense stress. Apocalyptical sects grew by the dozen at the time Christianity became popular. At the same time, the powerful Roman Empire that was bent on assimilation of conquered peoples meant that the old exclusivist Judaic ideal seemed impractical anymore. Thus the Christian idea of 'new Israel', and the 'new covenant', that would enable people of new backgrounds to be part of the Judaic world, under Christ, the new prophet. The death-wish of the orthodox Jews could become a new life, under the personality of the resurrected Christ. In the rest of the two millennia since, Christianity has vacillated in its emphasis on either the death of Christ or his resurrection, depending on whether it faced persecution or the opportunity for a 'new beginning'. Again, though originally Christianity was ascetic and other-worldly, the desire for the Roman Empire for a single unifying Imperial religion transformed Christianity into an aggressively power-seeking worldly religion. Socio-economics of pagan societies too, played an important role in their conversion to Christianity. Under immense stress due to aggressive Roman expansion and assimilation drive, and unable to connect to the older pagan religious ideals, ethnically diverse central Europe simply gave up the complex narratives of pagan religions for the simplistic Christian narrative. It also offered the prospect for unifying diverse tribes into new nation states – the energy of the family and the tribal loyalties of the pagan religions could now be transferred to the larger supra-tribe, the nation, which was reborn in a Christian mould.