You begin your post mentioning the two categories of belief systems. They are - as you call it- the formula types and bell curve types. I usually classify them as Semitic and Dharmic. The reason I mention this classification is that I will be using them interchangeably in this post. (i.e. formula = Semitic, and bell = Dharmic.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->formula religions are religions right of the bat, and over time begin to resemble a way of life. they prescribe a "path" or formula or "code" for all its followers to follow. this path is more often than not "delivered" by a prophet, whose sayings are recorded in a book, again often with additional inputs from others. the followers of such religions are the people of the book.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Both the Semitic and Dharmic religions prescribe rules and regulations. The Manu Smrithi and other Smrithis lay down a PATH, or a way of life to be followed. Nitya Karma (day to day duties) as well as "kamya-karma" (optional category) are prescribed. While Kamya-Karma is optional, Nitya-Karma is mandatory. Like Sandhya Vandanam, Agnihotram, Aupasanam etc. Thus, laying down of rules, and 'way of life' is not the proprietary property of Semitic sects. In this case, The Great Manu is the "Law Giver" (even though He is more than that.) equivalent to the Prophet who gives the Laws.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->the bell curve religions are on the other hand, firstly a way of life, which over time, as the curve crystallises, begins to resemble a religion. in between there may be a few books written which sort of "takes a snapshot" of the curve. for example the vedas (actual pronounciation = "Ved"). this book then becomes a book of the people. bell curve/way of life religions are in most cases "area specific" ie,. the way a people living in a certain geographical area live their life is different from a different kind of geographical area.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While the idea is noble, I would like to say that in case of the Dharmic Religion, atleast for Sanathana Dharma, the "Religion" existed well befor the 'bell curve crystallized'. Thus the semblance of a Religion befits Semitic sects rather than the Dharmic fold. Secondly, Vedas (pronunciation "Vedaa:") is not a snapshot at a point in time (even if it was 10,000 years ago.) But Vedas are a reflection of Truth that is Eternal. A snapshot is stagnant and is timebound. Vedas are definitely not stagnant nor timebound. (I am not infering stagnancy from your post, but am throwing it in to support my argument.) Finally, if Dharmic Religions were taken as area specific, then China and most of South East Asia cannot benefit from Buddhism. Even Sanathana Dharma is transcendental to Space, Time and Creation. The common mistake even Hindus make is to equate the Vedas with the books. This is unconsciously mimicing the Semitic concept of Book = Religion formula. Vedas are Apaurusheya (not man made) and are said to be existing even before Creation (of the material Universe.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->in the formula religions, tenets, doctrines, dos and donts are prescribed. in the way of life religions, ideally speaking, there should not be any tenets.....
where as in the formula religions, its the religion/"book" that defines the way the people should live) tend to try and "follow" the existing practices though they are perfectly free to do their own thing.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As mentioned above, Dharmic Religion has do's and donâts. Shankaracharya's Sadhana Panchakam for example will highlight these. The Bhagavad Geetha too tells of actions that leads to Hell, Heaven, or Liberation. Thus, while one is free to heed or reject the advise, these Dos and Don'ts are very well defined in Dharmic religion. The only difference is, Hindus now a days have chosen to reject most of the Dos and Don'ts owing to ignorance, arrogance, self-image, social-limitations, or simply laziness.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->the writers of the vedas could easily have put their foot down and concocted a "formula" or prescription from the vedas and asked every one to live like that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They could not have done it even if they wanted to. If they did, it would not be called Vedaah but will be called VedaHA (killer of Vedas). The Vedas are not mental creations of the Rishis. These are documentation of the Revelations of the Universal Truths which are unshakable. When defining Gravity or Blackholes, one cannot put in irrational concoctions and call it an unbiased Truth. Similarly Vedaah are Eternal Truths which were orally taught, and later documented for human convenience. The concoction part thus does not even figure when discussing Vedas.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->people are free to interpret the advice in any way, or ignore them or pick and choose from amongst it or follow it to the word.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is what happened when different Darshanas came up. They took a different view point of the Vedas. But each school (or Darshana) was trying to prove how ONLY their view point is right. Badharayana's Vedanta Sutras ultimately took the high ground. It is not appropriate to say Vedas are open to interpretation any-which-way. It has to confirm to a Parampara (tradition.) Advaita, Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita, Tantra, Yoga, Samkhya, Mimamsa, Vaisheshika etc can be adapted and given up any time as long as the Vedas themselves are taken to be Pramaanas (Authority). One cannot disregard Vedas and still attain the results like Liberation. Bauddha, Jaina, and Charvaka are also called Darshanas. They are Nastika Darshanas not because they reject God, but as they reject Vedic Authority. Samkhya is Asthika Darshana - even though it does not accept Ishwara - as it accepts Vedic Authority.
Thus, people cannot ignore or pick and choose indiscriminately. It has to be part of Parampara which again is sanctioned by the Vedas.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->formula religions are religions right of the bat, and over time begin to resemble a way of life. they prescribe a "path" or formula or "code" for all its followers to follow. this path is more often than not "delivered" by a prophet, whose sayings are recorded in a book, again often with additional inputs from others. the followers of such religions are the people of the book.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Both the Semitic and Dharmic religions prescribe rules and regulations. The Manu Smrithi and other Smrithis lay down a PATH, or a way of life to be followed. Nitya Karma (day to day duties) as well as "kamya-karma" (optional category) are prescribed. While Kamya-Karma is optional, Nitya-Karma is mandatory. Like Sandhya Vandanam, Agnihotram, Aupasanam etc. Thus, laying down of rules, and 'way of life' is not the proprietary property of Semitic sects. In this case, The Great Manu is the "Law Giver" (even though He is more than that.) equivalent to the Prophet who gives the Laws.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->the bell curve religions are on the other hand, firstly a way of life, which over time, as the curve crystallises, begins to resemble a religion. in between there may be a few books written which sort of "takes a snapshot" of the curve. for example the vedas (actual pronounciation = "Ved"). this book then becomes a book of the people. bell curve/way of life religions are in most cases "area specific" ie,. the way a people living in a certain geographical area live their life is different from a different kind of geographical area.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
While the idea is noble, I would like to say that in case of the Dharmic Religion, atleast for Sanathana Dharma, the "Religion" existed well befor the 'bell curve crystallized'. Thus the semblance of a Religion befits Semitic sects rather than the Dharmic fold. Secondly, Vedas (pronunciation "Vedaa:") is not a snapshot at a point in time (even if it was 10,000 years ago.) But Vedas are a reflection of Truth that is Eternal. A snapshot is stagnant and is timebound. Vedas are definitely not stagnant nor timebound. (I am not infering stagnancy from your post, but am throwing it in to support my argument.) Finally, if Dharmic Religions were taken as area specific, then China and most of South East Asia cannot benefit from Buddhism. Even Sanathana Dharma is transcendental to Space, Time and Creation. The common mistake even Hindus make is to equate the Vedas with the books. This is unconsciously mimicing the Semitic concept of Book = Religion formula. Vedas are Apaurusheya (not man made) and are said to be existing even before Creation (of the material Universe.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->in the formula religions, tenets, doctrines, dos and donts are prescribed. in the way of life religions, ideally speaking, there should not be any tenets.....
where as in the formula religions, its the religion/"book" that defines the way the people should live) tend to try and "follow" the existing practices though they are perfectly free to do their own thing.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As mentioned above, Dharmic Religion has do's and donâts. Shankaracharya's Sadhana Panchakam for example will highlight these. The Bhagavad Geetha too tells of actions that leads to Hell, Heaven, or Liberation. Thus, while one is free to heed or reject the advise, these Dos and Don'ts are very well defined in Dharmic religion. The only difference is, Hindus now a days have chosen to reject most of the Dos and Don'ts owing to ignorance, arrogance, self-image, social-limitations, or simply laziness.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->the writers of the vedas could easily have put their foot down and concocted a "formula" or prescription from the vedas and asked every one to live like that.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They could not have done it even if they wanted to. If they did, it would not be called Vedaah but will be called VedaHA (killer of Vedas). The Vedas are not mental creations of the Rishis. These are documentation of the Revelations of the Universal Truths which are unshakable. When defining Gravity or Blackholes, one cannot put in irrational concoctions and call it an unbiased Truth. Similarly Vedaah are Eternal Truths which were orally taught, and later documented for human convenience. The concoction part thus does not even figure when discussing Vedas.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->people are free to interpret the advice in any way, or ignore them or pick and choose from amongst it or follow it to the word.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is what happened when different Darshanas came up. They took a different view point of the Vedas. But each school (or Darshana) was trying to prove how ONLY their view point is right. Badharayana's Vedanta Sutras ultimately took the high ground. It is not appropriate to say Vedas are open to interpretation any-which-way. It has to confirm to a Parampara (tradition.) Advaita, Dvaita, Vishishtadvaita, Tantra, Yoga, Samkhya, Mimamsa, Vaisheshika etc can be adapted and given up any time as long as the Vedas themselves are taken to be Pramaanas (Authority). One cannot disregard Vedas and still attain the results like Liberation. Bauddha, Jaina, and Charvaka are also called Darshanas. They are Nastika Darshanas not because they reject God, but as they reject Vedic Authority. Samkhya is Asthika Darshana - even though it does not accept Ishwara - as it accepts Vedic Authority.
Thus, people cannot ignore or pick and choose indiscriminately. It has to be part of Parampara which again is sanctioned by the Vedas.