posted December 21, 2014 04:55 PM              

Now I am, most certainly, the furthest from an atheist. But I don't understand how the people, who make these very claims of love and kindness can be racist, sexist, homophobic, intolerant of certain religious groups, accusatory, judgmental and display unempathetic and insensitive behavior.

I don't understand that, if someone believes in God or a higher power, whose primary "ethic" is justice, love, equality for all how they could show such extreme contempt towards a certain demographic of people or have such hateful and loathsome views about others, be it on a collective or individual scale.

I am not discussing any legalities or religious rulings. I am not speaking about prohibitions or sins. But simply addressing the overarching general religious rhetoric that promotes forgiveness and compassion and yet, by the same token, firm "believers" who clearly demonstrate and promote ruthless and prejudiced behavior and ideologies. If God can forgive you for all of your sins, if God has been kind and merciful and compassionate to you, if God has saved you and you in return devote to your faith in God: how can you seek to destroy another? It doesn't make sense.

Is religiousness without spirituality the culprit? Could one call themselves pious without being spiritual? Or is it merely hypocrisy? I have been thinking so much about this both as someone who is particularly religious, but have come to find an emptiness in my practice having noticed the deprivation and lack in my soul and spirit. Why I emphasize and speak about this deprivation is because it truly is the source of my misery. I believe that harnessing and cleansing your soul and spirit is what truly instills love and compassion in the heart, not religiosity. Becoming intimately attuned to and in touch with one's soul is what compels one to embark upon the road of betterment and goodness, not church-going, proselytizing or praying 5 times in the mosque (though I do acknowledge the strength of moral, ethical and spiritual character that comes with a strong devotion to the combination of the two).

Due to difficult and trying circumstances and events that have pushed me to stray away from performing important religious rituals, I have found myself reevaluating not only who I am but also why religiousness has become a product of habituation rather than spiritual fulfillment. I have hit rock bottom in this regard, but I am slowly working on cultivating my spirituality in order to become a stronger believer and incorporate it within my religious practice, such that I do not become or condone the very kind of breed of religious that I am critiquing here... The very one that breeds hate, violence, extremism, desensitization, selfishness, egoism, and narcissism, as I would hate to be associated with this breed.

Would love to hear what people think on this matter.

*Some rules that I, as OP, request to be taken seriously*

If any insults or attacks are directed towards any religion or religious groups (be it Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, etc.), any demographic of people (ethnicities and races), or any hateful comments regarding personal life choices by ANYONE (LGBT, polyamory, atheism etc.) , I will request that this thread be shut down immediately.

Thoughtful and respectful critiques, opinions, and discussions are welcome 110% and I will be sure to discern the difference between the two. Usually, one is blatantly hostile. I am unapologetically Piscean, if I sense any implicit attacks and affirm by some 3rd party opinion that indeed I am not mis-intuiting something, I will request that this thread is shut down. To be extremely clear, some of the opinions and remarks that I have seen in GU2, and any comments of a similar nature, must be kept well away from this thread.

If you are incapable of handling a healthy argument and discussion on the topic without getting personal, unnecessarily defensive, emotional, or irrational, do not participate in this thread. Argue back with a concise argument not a commentary of how you feel or what you think of those that oppose what you believe.

This is about discussing religiousness and spirituality, and how the division of the two destroys the capacity to embody and enact the fundamental concepts of those that partake in the former and NOT the latter. Meaning to say that, one will always have and give peace, love, and compassion by feeding their soul as opposed to those that merely resort to the religiosity, without heeding to spirituality. My tendency to derail is epic, but I request that the discussion proceeds within safe and relevant margins and does not drift too far from the topic at hand. If I see this, I will draw attention to it.

Feel free to share personal experiences, a philosophical perspective, an analysis, whatever! Any form of contribution is welcome, as long as the above rules are kept in mind.

posted December 21, 2014 09:23 PM            

In the meantime I wanted to emphasize this part so it doesn't get missed:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PisceanDream:
If any insults or attacks are directed towards any religion or religious groups (be it Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, etc.), any demographic of people (ethnicities and races), or any hateful comments regarding personal life choices by ANYONE (LGBT, polyamory, atheism etc.) , I will request that this thread be shut down immediately.

Thoughtful and respectful critiques, opinions, and discussions are welcome 110% and I will be sure to discern the difference between the two.

---

posted December 22, 2014 01:37 AM            

Spirituality is a deeply personal experience and does not require one to be religious in any way... Interestingly the same can be said of religion; One does not need to be spiritual to be seen as deeply religious [Nods]

Why this mismatch... what's happening!?

From my own observations, many if not all major religions and cults generally stem from one INDIVIDUAL'S (Historical or Mythic it doesn't matter, the effect is the same) Spiritual Experience. Be it Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha, Zoroaster or Joseph Smith its the one thread of commonality they share... The religions that follow thereafter, the ritualized attempt at sharing that one persons spirituality with the larger group is where everything starts to go downhill.

Spirituality is a singular/solitary experience, which leaves religion the impossible task of trying to mass market it for everyone else so that they can check the box that's marked “One with God”. So very quickly any of the original spirituality involved at the forming of said religions (if there was even any to begin with) is soon lost, and is simply replaced by an empty idealized doctrine of what is means to be spiritual that most people find very hard to relate too.

This of course is self evident when one simply looks at the spiritual depravity on display from most religions, both now and over the course of history [Nods]

I know I'm using broad strokes here, but there is no other way to approach it.

posted December 22, 2014 02:33 AM            

I walked out of one store because of all the religious symbols...and it wasn't the religion it was the showing it off to such an extent, I have doubts that they were truly believers. I'm not talking about a single item, it was definite overkill to make sure you couldn't miss it no matter which direction you looked.

I've learned from con-artists that religion is an excellent way to manipulate and deceive people (a basic trick, when me and a few other kids were panhandling we were advised to pretend like we were praying silently at times, and it works...I felt bad for it so avoided it myself, even though I wasn't religious). And since then I've noticed the more fraudulent charities capitalize on religion and even read a book of letters of an ancient civilization and the gods get mentioned a lot more when asking someone for money!

People are all too easily fooled by appearances and manipulators capitalize on that, with religion being one such way they do so.

Others are more about ego...they'll go on about how good they are which can include religion because you'd never know it by their actions or accomplishments (or lack thereof).

posted December 22, 2014 04:31 AM            

Naturally, this is typically very selective such as with my aunt who uses a Bible verse to justify amending the Constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman but ignores the one right after it that is extremely restrictive on what is allowed for divorce and that by Biblical definition she herself is an adulterer and her current marriage is as sinful as any gay one. Naturally she becomes extremely hostile when this is pointed out (and doesn't think her marriage should be made illegal because of the Bible, just the gays) and keeps on ignoring it, only counting what she wants to count but swearing she is Biblical and living in accordance to all of it (as opposed to "all that matters to her and ignoring the rest").

In the case of my aunt, like many others, it also means they can feel better about their own sins. It shows they're still right with God by condemning someone else. Those most likely to condemn gays are either closeted gays themselves or adulterers, porn addicts, etc.

posted December 22, 2014 09:02 AM              

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lei_Kuei:
It is a vast topic, but the defunct position of assuming because one is religious, that this in turn means that they are also are very spiritual and a reflection of “their” benevolent god is clearly a major misconception.

I am in absolute agreement.

Spirituality is a deeply personal experience and does not require one to be religious in any way... Interestingly the same can be said of religion; One does not need to be spiritual to be seen as deeply religious [Nods]

Also very true, however, I do argue that being religious *alone* is problematic and can create a very distorted and flawed moral character.

Why this mismatch... what's happening!?

From my own observations, many if not all major religions and cults generally stem from one INDIVIDUAL'S (Historical or Mythic it doesn't matter, the effect is the same) Spiritual Experience. Be it Jesus, Mohammad, Buddha, Zoroaster or Joseph Smith its the one thread of commonality they share... The religions that follow thereafter, the ritualized attempt at sharing that one persons spirituality with the larger group is where everything starts to go downhill.

Again, I am in total agreement here. Rings very true to my perception as well. Practicing religion is quite a collective process and experience. However, cultivating spirituality is not. It definitely goes back to your first point, there's this misconception regarding the relationship between religiosity and spirituality. Being religious doesn't entail being spiritual. Bringing such a misconception and expanding up on it, intellectualizing it and politicizing it is what I believe can spark extremist ideology. The soul is dead but the religious drive is rigorous. Religious laws and views are taken as absolutes, interpreted in ways that disregard the inherent sense of humanity both within and without the religion itself.

Spirituality is a singular/solitary experience, which leaves religion the impossible task of trying to mass market it for everyone else so that they can check the box that's marked “One with God”. So very quickly any of the original spirituality involved at the forming of said religions (if there was even any to begin with) is soon lost, and is simply replaced by an empty idealized doctrine of what is means to be spiritual that most people find very hard to relate too.

This of course is self evident when one simply looks at the spiritual depravity on display from most religions, both now and over the course of history [Nods]

Yupp and yupp. I do believe that all religions and their prophets (for the lack of a better term) set the framework of religion USING spirituality. Look at prophet Jesus, for example, whose compassion and love knew no bounds. Or prophet Moses who fought for the freedom of what in retrospect are referred to as Jews. Or prophet Mohammed, who, despite having had his house trashed and ambushed and attacked by a jew who hated and loathed him, visited that very same man once he heard he was sick. That man, from the compassion that prophet Mohammed has showed, converted to Islam by his own will. And how about the covenant of prophet Mohammed to the Christians, for example. People have strayed far away from the foundation of religion: spirituality. Religion has become a weapon used to defend sick and perverse behavior and ideology. It has become the shield which cowards cower behind to justify the illness in their hearts, the result of a depraved and distorted soul.

---

posted December 22, 2014 05:04 PM            

As I see it, promises of salvation are predicated on the assumption that a person will be happy with a scheme that enables them to go to heaven while others suffer in hell. Therefore, salvation schemes appeal to the ego, the individual, the spirit encased in a shell.

Spirituality = dissolution of walls.

In the purest sense we are all interconnected and, if we know that, we can take no comfort in a religious scheme that bisects people into two groups: the saved and unsaved, the Christians and pagans, us and them. All of that is illusion, and a seed of war and destruction.

posted December 22, 2014 07:46 PM            

ITA with everything that has been said so far.

posted December 23, 2014 03:44 AM            

PisceanDream, I think the biggest problem with discovering/nurturing ones own sense of spirituality is that it's different for everyone. I myself just associate my own spiritual awareness with what Id call “Peak Experiences”.

But I've listened to people talk about their own religious experiences that has left them perhaps with the same feelings as I get from non-religious things, and so I don't feel it makes my experiences or theirs any less valid since it indicates that spirituality is not religiously, or even non-religiously exclusive.

If that's really the case, and if spirituality is indeed only a subjective experience that does not require one to be religious then one has to ask themselves... What purpose if any does religion serve if it not only fails to covey the sense of spirituality experienced by its founder? But worse still... It seems wholly unnecessary in its bare functionality at even conveying a basic humanist doctrine of morality that dosent demonize or marginalize large portions of society [Shakes Head]

And so I feel that it is with rare exception that you find a person who is both deeply religious and deeply spiritual, and yet if you removed religion, praying, or going to church from their current routine of experiences I'm sure that not a single drop of their own spiritual essence would be lost and if anything, perhaps their cup would truly runneth over with a new found sense of spiritual awareness free from the structure they had previously bound themselves too.

Then ask yourself, what would happen if you removed from their experience - That persons sense of spirituality/universal connection, while having them continue their ritualized devotion to their preferred religion... Well, I think we see this very much on display every other day and its a sorry sight to behold :\

posted December 23, 2014 03:53 AM            

The fascinating part to me that being raised in a tradition that's thousands of years old, and typically from countries much older than those in the Americas (or immediately descended from those who are) all that history is part of who they are. They have feast days and celebrations for evens centuries and even thousands of years ago, and to them the church goes all the way back to the Council of Nicea which thus links them to God. And these types take God serious, I've seen them reverently touch priest robes and other props with utter belief that it could cure them of cancer and the like.

I've heard stories from them like where an irate priest blessed some commercial bread in a fit of spite and the church spent a lot of money to buy up that bread because to them all that bread had about literally become the flesh of Jesus!

Though what I'd have liked to seen was the reaction over some altar boys who put popcorn kernels into the censor that started popping as the priest conducted the ritual and unable to stop as it would mess up their touching the divine and so the priest continued chanting as he shook the censor raining down popcorn on devout believers as they chanted. Hope those boys could sit down without pain by the end of the day. Maybe Eris put in a good word for them.

So in light of that, where battles over a thousand years ago still matter very much (as there are still ceremonies based on them, and interesting enough the Russian Orthodox celebrate a divine intervention of sorts by the Theotokos/Mother of God, IIRC, who saved the Greeks of Constantinople from Russian pagan invaders but the Greek Orthodox don't celebrate that one) so that things like the Fourth Crusade is part of their history as well and feeds into their anger.

From their perspective it's the Catholic Church that broke away rather than how the Catholics teach it (I did some research using as many secular sources as I could and it does seem the Eastern Orthodox are closer to being right, though I'd say the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox were actually more parallel developments from the same roots) which they see as incorrect and even insulting on the part of the Catholic Church at best and blasphemy to them at worst. The Fourth Crusade really was over the top, and there have been arguments and even military conflict between the two for centuries after (even in Bosnia of the 90s the Serbian Orthodox and Catholic forces were killing each other which officially goes back to WW2 but actually goes back to wars centuries ago, and plenty of martyrs are celebrated in church rituals, including those martyred by Catholics, and I'm sure vice versa, which means remembering those martyrs then becomes part of the faith and thus they carry it with them which must tempt them to expect the worst of the entire group).

Not saying Catholics are monsters, mind you, I'm trying to explain where the distrust, antipathy, and sometimes outright hatred comes from and how the past is a living thing still alive today...call it blind karma if you will (speaking of which, A Lesson in Karma by RAW, perhaps Jesus would approve that message more than many of the Christian clergy). And I'm well aware of the atrocities of the Serbian Orthodox as well, including Milošević, though interesting enough when I was talking about the Serbian War with a Russian (a secular one at that) he got confused when I, unable to remember his name, said he was the Butcher of the Balkans and he asked, "Clinton?" Seems the Eastern Orthodox (from Greeks to Russians) call Clinton that (and they can make a good case for it, btw) rather than, apparently, someone who roughly shares the same faith as them (or at least surrounded by people who do and absorb that attitude as my secular Russian friend apparently did).

posted December 23, 2014 04:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lei_Kuei:
PixieJ & Vajra, I love hearing about those types of personal experiences which to me are often so alien and far removed from my own upbringing that I'm really left shaking my head going... WTF! But It really helps me to gain a better understanding of the many facets of religion and how people use it as a means to often justify all kinds of insanity; Thanks for sharing [Nods

---

YW.

posted December 23, 2014 04:10 AM            

So when I visited Granny in 2004 I considered myself a Heathen neo-pagan (I honored plenty of gods, Eris was one I was especially fond of, though Freya was my patron and I believed Her literally real rather than merely symbolic) and we compared notes. I then asked her if she'd visit me in [Freya's Heaven] when we were dead as I figured Freya was a lot more tolerant than Jehovah.

She laughed and said, "You'll see your trappings and I'll see mine but we'll still be together and love each other."

posted December 23, 2014 09:36 AM              

Something similar to samadhi of chanting would be what in Islam is referred to as "Dua'a", in English it would mean: the Calling/the Invitation. It's usually done after prayer or at any time one wishes... Where one just speaks to God, pours out their woes and worries, their desires and feelings. It's very therapeutic and is generally similar to the Christian concept of prayer. Every time I have done Dua'a, I've always felt at ease. So I like the concept of chanting, praying, or calling forth onto a higher being or even onto one's higher self.

I do not think, generally speaking, that the concept of religiosity within religion serves a moral purpose than it does an ethical one. Most sins and prohibitions speak more to one's ethical character than one's moral character. It is very sociological more than it is psychological or spiritual. However, the ideal framework for any religion to operate within would be a spiritual one. It is often that this message is critically emphasized and yet thoroughly and wholesomely ignored. The rhetoric, as you've mentioned, is very easy to manipulate and misinterpret, such that it becomes a tool for mass hypnosis, control, and destruction even.

Both you and Pixie have been adamant (and rightly so) in addressing the hypocrisy that comes from empty worship. How the most "pious" are usually those that display such appalling and even downright illegal behavior. An example within Islamic culture and community, is the out of context use of the Qur'an in justifying the degradation and subjugation of women. The Qur'an clearly states that one should NEVER judge someone on their past sins, and that a woman should be valued and loved for her moral and spiritual character when you meet her, and not certainly not her past and her "history". Unfortunately, women who are not virgins have always been on the receiving end of a ruthless stigmatization. The knowledge, even, that a woman is not a virgin would drive away almost any man who had previously took interest in knowing her despite how kind, loving, compassionate, generous, and righteous of a person she is.

I do believe that there is a balance between religiousness and spirituality. Divorcing religion from spirituality burns the soul and contaminates it entirely, this contaminations spill over and pollute society and creates social constructs that are detrimental to the betterment of humanity. But I also feel that spirituality which doesn't ontologically question one's embodiment and thrownness in the world, the nature/essence of humanity, or existence is also one that is empty. In fact, I believe that spirituality is meant to cultivate soul. I don't think one can be entirely spiritual without doing so. But I do believe that the definition and understanding of soul differs from one discourse to the next.

posted December 23, 2014 10:26 AM            

I'm enjoying your responses.

PD, as far as ritual is concerned, my thinking is like yours: there is a place for ritual in our lives. Whatever is worth doing is worth repeating, and calling on symbols, archetypes, material corollaries can be helpful and beautiful. (As I see it, beauty itself has spiritual value.)

In my thinking, living in tune with natural rhythms (circadian, seasonal, astrological) is a kind of sadhana; as is eating food that optimizes one health, in a spirit of gratitude. Wearing crystals that enhance one's spiritual being, cleansing them and maintaining their power; perfuming the air with essential oils or flowers; wearing natural fabrics; listening to calming music...the loose customs of New Age, secular people parallel the components of most religions but in an unforced and unstructured way.

quote:

---

However, the ideal framework for any religion to operate within would be a spiritual one.

---

Yes and I agree that a framework, a pattern, a repetition of what's useful, is most conducive to enlightenment. Which is where many regular people such as myself fail to develop any latent spiritual power: in a failure to habituate the striving for it.

quote:

---

In fact, I believe that spirituality is meant to cultivate soul. I don't think one can be entirely spiritual without doing so.

---

Yes, CULTIVATION is what I mean.

quote:

---

Well, so much for that. It taught me not to underestimate another's spirituality just because of the label one puts on the practice; I had completely overlooked the possibility that there might be other ways to reach the same mystical states. After that, I discovered such stuff had already been written down centuries ago by Christian mystics such as Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross. To me, those descriptions read very similar as Kundalini rising experiences as described by Yogis…and I'm sure, Shamanist and Sufi descriptions of similar states would lead to a similar conclusion, although I'm not too familiar with them.

---

posted December 23, 2014 10:27 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PixieJane:
Though what I'd have liked to seen was the reaction over some altar boys who put popcorn kernels into the censor that started popping as the priest conducted the ritual and unable to stop as it would mess up their touching the divine and so the priest continued chanting as he shook the censor raining down popcorn on devout believers as they chanted. Hope those boys could sit down without pain by the end of the day. Maybe Eris put in a good word for them.

---

heheheheheh

posted December 24, 2014 11:38 AM            

Similar to what you were saying about Buddhism lining up with what you grasped in meditation: my beliefs and experiences are intertwined as well. For example, I had no opinion whatsoever about tantra until I had a tantric experience, spontaneously. Only THEN did the discussion make sense.

I had no opinion of Reiki healing...I figured it could work for real or just be some hyped-up market-driven weirdo phenomenon... until I happened to befriend a Reiki healer. And that changed everything.

I've also encountered evil spirits, which forced me to recognize their reality, against my will.