Thought of the Day

When you get down to it, all religions are employed to define and direct us to be an outstanding human citizen.

The fundamental difference between western religions (Christianity, Catholicism, etc.) and eastern religions (Buddhism, Taoism, etc.) is simply:

The former motivates on fear: if you're not good you'll go to hell. While the latter motivates by...well, nothing really. Sure, there's something to strive for- enlightenment, nirvana- but none of those endpoints are described to be particularly pleasant or lovely.

Basic Divergences:

• God: The first 4 commandments dictate a single and transcendent God, for which there is "no other". In the west, you'd have to say there is no God (for anyone can achieve the topmost level of nirvana) or there are countless (depending on location or situation). There's no concept of a God that's all powerful, since each one is limited by area of expertise.
  I like to think of these folks as "specialized".
• Consequences: In eastern religions, there is no such thing as punishment. That's not to say actions don't have consequences, that's addressed by the concept of karma. According to Wikipedia, "Through the law of karma, the effects of all deeds actively create past, present, and future experiences, thus making one responsible for one's own life, and the pain and joy it brings to him/her and others." Essentially, I should not kill my neighbor because at the end, I have to answer to myself and the reality of my deed. Based on western teachings, I will not kill my neighbor because God would smite me down.
  Now which of those motivations is more viscerally powerful? Err, I plead the 5th.
  
• Transience: Of course, all religions must establish a sense of permanence, which gives the practitioner a sense of comfort and value beyond the immediate. However, the eastern teachings eliminate transience (for better or worse) more thoroughly than the west. "Carpe diem!" is a neat inspirational catchphrase, but humans generally can not live in the moment, cling to a sense of self-grandeur, and cower before the transience of existence. Both types of religions employ "the soul" as a permanent fixture beyond time and flesh & bones. However, eastern practices establishes a permanence to one's actions (see Wiki quote above) through time. To me, it seems a bit harsh to bear the consequences of any deed for the duration of all existence. But what's the alternative? Western religions employ the concept of "confession", which has no statute of limitations. Theoretically, you may live an entire lifetime in sin, but on your deathbed you can "repent and be forgiven".
  I can't help but think about a court of law (they do both call it judgment). In our legal system, a confession made in duress and significant emotional distress is labeled coerced and thrown out. Now, wouldn't you say that laying on one's deathbed is emotionally distressing? Or at least you'll have to give me this: the threat of eternal damnation is a damn good (pun intended) coercion technique.
  
• Goals: If I live according to the western teachings, I will be rewarded with heaven, a place of perfect goodness, "…a place of light, a place of green pasture, a place of repose, whence all sickness, sorrow and sighing are fled away for all eternity." If I abide by the eastern standards, I can hope for a transient reprieve from the suffering of life (Samsara), after which my karma will rebirth me into a human, animal or other being. Gee, how gracious.
  

Good God, I'm going to hell or coming back as a dung-beetle for writing this entry.