Exoteric and Esoteric Religion


For millennia now, mankind has constantly fallen back on religion as a means to explain the universe and his place in it. With the advent of science, there is still an ephemeral entity lurking behind the numbers, which we call God. Yet even this inconceivable figure has been a subject of debate, and there are a great number of people who reject the notion of a divine creator which is far and beyond human understanding. Around God, though, a fortress of doctrines and laws has been built...a fortress which has earned the moniker of 'institutionalized religion.'
It is because of this fortress that a great many people seek the answers which religion, whether exoteric or esoteric, has always sought to provide. Institutionalized religion, to many, presents precious little option for personal interpretation of the ideas which that religion presents. The 'truth', in exoteric religion, is embodied in the doctrines of the church, and therefore, those who want to be free to find their own paths to enlightenment, are often drawn towards esoteric religion.
Esoteric religion is geared toward helping the individual achieve a more personal elucidation of life, the universe, and everything. Through the teachings of a religion which proclaims itself 'free' of institutional constraints, a person may be able to define their own ideas of their relationship to the universe. But the problem with this is that the more people who are polarized from rigidly institutionalized religion and drawn toward the esoteric, they, often without realizing it, create a formal system of religious practice themselves. A good number of religions become institutionalized because of their popularity as an alternative to other, more rigid religions.
It is quite hard to imagine any esoteric religion that will not, in time, become institutionalized, because of the very nature of religion itself. Religion is the age-old practice of trying to find answers, simple as that. Those who are drawn towards esoteric religion are in search of answers which have a more personal meaning, trying to find answers within themselves, which help them come to an individual understanding with the cosmos. Yet if the answers found by those who claim to be enlightened by their personal experiences with the cosmos are appealing enough, then they will eventually attract followers who also seek this same identification. Because these followers will want to know how they too can find these answers, the paths to find those answers in accordance with the methods used by the original transcendant will be, more or less, uniform. The only way in which a religion can be truly esoteric is to not be a religion at all, but a singularly personal experience.
Exoteric religions, on the other hand, are the founders of society. There are few government on Earth which does has not had its foundations formed by institutionalized morality. Because man is a social animal, exoteric religion is the most natural, hence the most powerful, of the two types. The very fact that it is institutionalized implies its popularity and appeal to those who make up its vast congregations.
They are, in effect, reflections of man's inherent predilection for structure. The search for the whys and wherefores of the universe has led us to found religions which have historically defined social reality. Exoteric religions, therefore, have roots in esoteric needs to understand ourselves and the universe. They have the effect, because of their mass appeal and rigid structure, of forging social order.
Yet even though exoteric religions are formed of doctrines, laws, and rituals, there are myriad different sects which are founded by people who have formulated their own esoteric interpretations of intrinsically exoteric elements. Because these sects provide new and different interpretations while still maintaining an exoteric structure, they too will become rigidly institutionalized...if their explanations are plausible.
One reason the dichotomy exists between exoteric, structured religions and the more fundamentally personal esoteric ones is one of the plausibility of the answers to which either type of religion is inclined to engender. The person who prefers an exoteric structure will more than likely find esoteric religion to be incapable of addressing universal truths, while the esoterically inclined will pity the poor puppet who is too blinded by what the institution wants him to believe to ever find the truth. But even though there is a recognized polarization between the two, they keep each other in balance, and it is indeed critical that this balance be maintained.
It is evident throughout history that there is indeed trouble in the midst of society when a single exoteric structure becomes dominant. It will eventually become the force behind wars and conquest, as is evidenced by the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Holocaust, and countless other campaigns. However, it is important that there be some if not universally then widely recognized morality, which is exoterically defined, for the maintenance of a coherent social order. A fine example of such is the United States, who's moral, political, and social structures are founded in the Judeo-Christian tradition of democracy.
On the other side of the coin, the trouble about a society with no shared views about how to deal with each other, no exoteric morality, is probably doomed. The reason for this is people will eventually be so stratified according to their belief systems, then the strongest (and the most organized) will naturally come to dominate. This particular belief system will undoubtedly become institutionalized no matter what esoteric claims they espouse.
Morality, i.e., a sense of good and righteousness, is a feeling whose foundations are inherent in the greater part of the human race. But the problem with morality is that although it is inherent, it is subjective, and there are myriad interpretations of what it is exactly. A great number of people, though, will agree that it is the same thing, that a great number of people share a common morality, with or without religion. This is one of the reasons religion came about, a common inherent morality anthropomorphized in order to explain it.
A great number of people realize that morality is indeed subjective, and this may be the reason why they scoff at the notion of institutionalized religion. They may feel that rules and regulations have no business dictating morality because of its subjective nature, so they choose an esoteric path in order to understand it on a purely subjective level.
Let me use myself as an example. I am agnostic. I believe that any attempt to understand God and his ways are doomed to fail because the human mind simply cannot comprehend them. The notions of infinity, eternity, and the omni-attributes of God are far and beyond the current level of human intellect. I also believe that God is irrelevant, because both law and morality have the same importance with or without it (God). The reason I do not deny God altogether is because I recognize an apparent order in the universe and the world in general, and it would be immoderate to discount the existence of some higher power responsible for it.
This is not to say, however, that if there is a God, that mankind will never come to terms with it. I am a great believer in science, though, and if we are to come to an understanding of God, it will most likely come from that direction. There are many physicists and mathematicians who are attempting to find some way to bind the Einstein's theory of relativity and the theory of quantum mechanics into the Unified, or Quantum, Theory of Gravity. Such a marriage, they say, is an attempt to "understand the mind of God" (A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking).
Agnosticism is without a doubt an esoteric approach to dealing with life. However, I do realize that there is a need for an exoteric morality. This is because such a morality, as stated before, lay the foundations for social order. The legal philosopher H.L.A. Hart has traced the evolution of law from the institutionalization of morality in his ideas of the primary and secondary rules of society. The primary rules are the unestablished yet generally adhered to rules of conduct and etiquette practiced by society, which stem from a social morality.
The secondary rules eventually come about because the primary rules are inconsistent, static, and in many cases, unjust. They are inconsistent because although generally adhered to, no one is sure exactly what they are, and because of this, those who do not know what those rules are ridiculed. They also have a tendency to not meet the needs of a changing society, and thus many rules which do not flow well with the majority still hang around. And thus, because of these problems, there is no set punishment for transgression, and often social pressure is not enough to deal with those who do transgress. Those secondary rules cohere all these things into recognizable and referential ideas which mark the beginning of a consistent social order: the rules of recognition, change, and adjudication.

Moi Aussi.