The religions have been exploiting man's psychology in every possible way. Man of course is weak, unprotected. In a vast world he is so tiny. Life is so short, diseases are millions, and even if he somehow manages to dodge cancer and tuberculosis and all the diseases, he cannot dodge death; that is going to come anyway.
Death, disease, weakness, the unknown universe create so much fear -- and nobody to protect.... It was a simple step to give God the father as the protector. And man's inner space was in such a need, he accepted it. He was not capable of doubting it, because to doubt means to live almost on the verge of a nervous breakdown.
And with God comes the priest; he becomes the mediator. He becomes more powerful than politicians. In religious countries like India, politicians go and touch the feet of Hindu priests -- of course, only before election time. Then for five years they don't bother about the priest, about the temples. But as the election comes near they start going on religious pilgrimages to temples far away in the Himalayas, touching the feet of any stupid priest, asking for blessings.
The priest holds more power; the politician's power is mundane. The priest's power has entered in the very spirit of man.
That's why religions did not allow science to move into their territory. First they did not allow science even to move into the objective world -- the subjective world was out of the question. They did not want them even to explore the objective world, the material world.
Strange, because religions are not concerned with matter, and if somebody is exploring matter, why should they be disturbed? There was a reason: if the scientist succeeds in discovering the mysteries and the secrets of matter, his second step is bound to be to explore the subjectivity of man. It is better to cut it from the very roots, rather than to wait.
So for three hundred years religion has been fighting continuously against every invention, every discovery. But because science is based not on belief, but on doubt -- it accepts something only when there is no doubt possible about it. And then too it accepts it only hypothetically. That has to be understood. That shows the humbleness of scientific effort.
Hypothetical acceptance means: "Tomorrow new facts may be discovered, and we may have to change the theory. So for the time being we accept. Remember, for the time being -- not forever. All that we know up to now is in agreement with the discovery, but who knows about tomorrow? People may invent more subtle instruments, and tomorrow new facts may arise and the theory will not be able to stand those new facts. Hence, it is only hypothetical, for the time being."
This is true humbleness. They are not arrogant about things which are absolutely proved! Still they will not say that this is absolutely proved, because infinity is waiting.
So all scientific statements are relative, never absolute.
Religious statements are always absolute. It does not say, "Perhaps God exists."
Science, making every discovery, says, "It is hypothetical, perhaps tomorrow we will have to change it." And in three hundred years we had to change many times -- that is enough proof.
What Newton has found, Albert Einstein has to discard, because he penetrated deeper. Naturally, he is grateful to Newton. Without Newton, Einstein would not have been able to penetrate deeper. He is standing on the shoulders of Newton; that's why he can see a little far away, which Newton could not. But he is aware somebody someday will be standing on his shoulders and he will be able to look even farther. That's why he called his theory, the theory of relativity.
Now in science there will be no absolute statement. Everything will be relative to the knowledge, to the time, and we will remain open to change it if reality reveals new secrets, new facts.
Religion was afraid of two things: one, the basic method of science -- doubt. Religion is against doubt, it is all for faith. And if doubt succeeds in revealing objective reality, then the day is not far away when somebody will start using the same methodology to explore consciousness. That's what we are doing here. Using the same methods which have proved solid in the objective world... now we have to take those methods to the subjective reality.
Religion tried in every possible way, but could not succeed -- nobody can succeed against truth. The religions had the whole world with them; the scientists were individuals, they had no power. But truth gave them such immense power that millions of people who were in favor of religion could not prevent their truth. They could not prove that it was not true, they had to accept it -- reluctantly, unwillingly.